71–80 of 169 posts
How are these AI recaps generated? Are they fed a video file of the entire game and it spits out a summary, or maybe a score tally with timestamps for goals (written by a human) which the AI then pads with language and makes into a story?
If "this is the last game for Alex Morgan" wasn't included as any part of the input/prompt, how on earth could the AI summary have come up with this for inclusion in the game recap? If some teenage intern was given a table with the goals scored (player and minute mark), they would have written a similar article... but that's definitely not a good excuse for news orgs and sports sites to just use generative AI for eve…
> If "this is the last game for Alex Morgan" wasn't included as any part of the input/prompt, how on earth could the AI summary have come up with this for inclusion in the game recap? It couldn't, which is the problem. One of the big selling points of generative AI is to cut people out of the process of writing. If someone actually has to watch the game and describe what happened in the prompt, what's the point of th…
I know we're supposed to be shaking our fist at these stupid AIs, but why should Morgan be mentioned? Did she score any goals? Did she get much playing time? I didn't watch the game myself, but it's entirely possible she did nothing notable on the field. So is the AI really mistaken?
Specifically to this game: it also literally affected the game (maybe not in points, but it did have an impact), and that it wasn't mentioned means the information provided for the game was inaccurate.
If AI is going to summarize a game, it should do so accurately. It did not do that in this case, and that's not debatable. It was wrong. It did not accurately report the game.
> ESPN made a point to note that “each AI-generated recap will be reviewed by a human editor to ensure quality and accuracy.” It’s unclear if the human editor failed to notice Morgan’s absence or also decided it was not worth mentioning. I don't believe they'll have a human editor ensure quality and accuracy. The whole point of having AI write your stories is to minimize the number of people they have to pay, so payi…
I don't think that holds up. They can save a lot of money by using generated articles, but they lose customer (advertiser) confidence if the content isn't accurate. One editor per ten replaced writers is still a significant cost savings.
A few iterations from now we might see editors getting replaced too, but I don't think we're there yet.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
the depression shouldn't arise from the generation, but from the consumption, for it is the latter that ultimately drives the former; that, in turn, can generate a reflection on what I myself consume.
I don't think people do actually consume it. In my experience this content was purely for SEO or maybe just a headline that people read quickly to keep up-to-date. The actual article content is rarely seen by a human.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
the depression shouldn't arise from the generation, but from the consumption, for it is the latter that ultimately drives the former; that, in turn, can generate a reflection on what I myself consume.
I don't think people do actually consume it. In my experience this content was purely for SEO or maybe just a headline that people read quickly to keep up-to-date. The actual article content is rarely seen by a human.
If "this is the last game for Alex Morgan" wasn't included as any part of the input/prompt, how on earth could the AI summary have come up with this for inclusion in the game recap? If some teenage intern was given a table with the goals scored (player and minute mark), they would have written a similar article... but that's definitely not a good excuse for news orgs and sports sites to just use generative AI for eve…
It's pretty funny to me that this is used as a hit-piece against AI generated content. Here's an open-secret for everyone: web-based sports content companies have been automatically generating content articles for at least a decade; way before LLMs became popular. It is and was mostly done for search ranking. The more seemingly applicable content, the better your SEO. This situation has probably happened several time…
I know we're supposed to be shaking our fist at these stupid AIs, but why should Morgan be mentioned? Did she score any goals? Did she get much playing time? I didn't watch the game myself, but it's entirely possible she did nothing notable on the field. So is the AI really mistaken?
From the article. Or is the claim that the AI model should expect there's nothing noteworthy about this series of events?