If we need summaries, let’s let a human being write the summaries. We are already experts at writing. We love doing it.
count_dongulus@lemmy.world 1 week ago
Summarization is one of the things LLMs are pretty good at. Same for the other thing where they talked about auto-generating the “simple article” variants that are normally managed by hand to dumb down content.
But if they’re pushing these tools, they need to be pushed as handy tools for editors to consider leveraging, not forced behavior for end users.
sentient_loom@sh.itjust.works 1 week ago
propitiouspanda@lemmy.cafe 1 week ago
not forced behavior for end users.
This is what I’m constantly criticizing. It’s fine to have more options, but they should be options and not mandatory.
No, having to scroll past an AI summary for every fucking article is not an ‘option.’ Having the option to hide it forever (or even better, opt-in), now that’s a real option.
I’d really love to see the opt-in/opt-out data for AI. I guarantee businesses aren’t including the option or recording data because they know it will show people don’t want it, and they have to follow the data!
davidgro@lemmy.world 1 week ago
Summaries that look good are something LLMs can do, but not summaries that actually have a higher ratio of important/unimportant than the source, nor ones that keep things accurate. That last one is super mandatory on something like an encyclopedia.
prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 week ago
The only application I’ve kind of liked so far has been the one on Amazon that summarizes the content of the reviews. Seems relatively accurate in general.