- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
As the showrunner grows his darkly comic satire into a franchise — and spoofs a certain trial and presidential election in the new season — he says he’s fine losing the viewers who just figured out his social agenda: “Go watch something else.”
You realise you are reacting with feelings to a bot? I read the whole article and it’s just an interview format which makes no sense to summarise. I mean you can always disregard, but it does save some time most of the time, helping you quickly judge if the content is worth a full read or not without opening the link. It’s a technology
I am very aware of that it is a bot 😄. And I have to say: a rather bad-its-job one, not just in this case.
Whenever I read one of its “summaries” it was blatantly obvious that it just cuts parts, often times mauling paragraphs and destroying contexts. And that does not offer any value to me, hence I permanently disregard it now by putting that account on a block list (next to other not-so-great bot accounts).
that’s actually what the underlying method does, as this is extractive summary, hence it mostly cuts and stitches things.
From my naive understanding, this type of method does not use or “understand” context.
The alternative is abstractive summary, which is where LLMs (or even small/medium language models) are good for. But I suspect that would be a controversial choice on lemmy.
I think that this is the logical place to put those opinions - it would make less sense unlinked to the post.
I dislike that it’s been shotgunned at nearly every post I see, regardless of how relevant it might be, and I don’t trust the output to represent the link.
Given there’s no “bad bot” style feedback functionality (that I know of), what else is there to do than block it?
Github feedback? The bot’s code didn’t write itself. I doubt the programmer(s) read all the posts that the bot generates