People really don’t understand the current state of LLM, like the pictures generated “Its a really good picture of what a dog would look like, it’s not actually a dog”. Like a police sketch, with a touch of “randomeness” so you don’t always get the same picture.

I’m guessing they will try to solve this issue with some cheap human labour to review what is being generated. These verifers will probably not be experts on all the subjects that the llm will be spitting out, more of a “That does kind of look like a dog, APPROVED”.

Let’s say I’m wrong, and LLM’s can make as good of an article as any human. The content would be so saturated (even a tumblr user could now make as good and as much content as one of these companies), I would expect companies to be joining in on all the strikes 😆.

Funny world we are all going into.

Boas Entradas

ChatGPT comments on the news:

Prompt : In recent news, the management of “How it’s Made” has fired all the writers and editors on the show and intends to replace them with a large language model. What do you think?

ChatGPT

As an AI language model, I don’t have personal opinions or feelings, but I can provide an analysis based on the information available up to my last update in September 2021.

If the management of “How It’s Made” decides to fire all the writers and editors on the show and replace them with a large language model like me, there are both potential benefits and drawbacks to consider:

Benefits:

Cost Savings: Employing an AI language model could potentially reduce production costs as it eliminates the need for paying human writers and editors.
Speed and Efficiency: AI models can generate content at a rapid pace, which may allow for more frequent episode releases or updates.
Access to Data: AI models have access to vast amounts of data, which could result in more comprehensive and detailed explanations of the manufacturing processes.
Consistency: AI-generated content can maintain a consistent style and tone throughout the episodes.

Drawbacks:

Lack of Creativity: While AI models can provide factual information, they might struggle to inject creative elements or engage with the audience on a more emotional level.
Human Touch: Human writers and editors bring their unique perspectives and storytelling abilities to the show, which might be missed with an AI-only approach.
Reliability: AI-generated content can sometimes produce errors or inaccurate information, which would require careful human oversight and fact-checking.
Audience Response: The audience's perception of AI-generated content might not be as positive as content created by human professionals, leading to a potential decrease in viewership.

Ultimately, the success of this decision would depend on how well the AI language model can replicate the engaging and informative aspects that made “How It’s Made” popular in the first place. It’s important for the management to carefully evaluate the pros and cons and ensure a seamless transition if they decide to go down this route. Additionally, audience feedback and receptiveness to the AI-generated content will play a significant role in determining the long-term viability of such a change.

Great. Now people are going to read up a bunch of bs generated by a language model and confidently spread around “hallucinations” as facts.

How long until we can a browser extension that lets us know when we are on a site written by AI?

I don’t mean AI detection, but instead, sites that announce they are laying off editors in favor of AI.