7 ms·

I ran across this article while researching a stock and as I read, I kept thinking, "This was not written by a person. This was written by software." [0] I che

I ran across this article while researching a stock and as I read, I kept thinking, "This was not written by a person. This was written by software." [0] I checked the attribution, and there is a person's name on it. Sure, any hack can write and publish and this is probably just another example. But the odd style doesn't even strike me as 'writing the way I think' or writing and publishing quickly without editing. For example, from the 2nd paragraph, "The corresponding low also paints a picture and suggests that the low is nothing but a 97.89% since 11/14/16." I can't gather any meaning from that statement, yet it has oddly specific details. I am not glad to see this trend and not glad that Google is embarking on this path. I suppose it is inevitable, but unless there is expertise built into this AI that can extract meaning from data on my behalf and present it in a way that is more insightful and interesting than I am, it will become yet another source of chaff I'll have to filter. Can we at least, please, flag AI generated prose as such? [0] https://www.nystocknews.com/2017/07/05/tesla-inc-tsla-showcases-what-it-has-to-offer-via-the-technical-chart/ https://www.nystocknews.com/2017/07/05/tesla-inc-tsla-showca...

semperdark 9y ago
I've also noticed this on financial/stock news articles. I've seen a few of them use full 4-word names for corporations ("The Coca-Cola Company") dozens of times in one article, and multiple times per sentence.
- dom0 9y ago
  These are indeed frequently generated automatically.
- fjdlwlv 9y ago
  Yes, finance and sports and weather and other metrics reporting is already highly automated.
  - lspress 9y ago
    Automated Insights https://automatedinsights.com https://automatedinsights.com - writes all the routine corporate earnings stories for Associated Press so they can cover more companies and let journalists actually investigate and write more nuanced pieces. Some earnings reports start with the software writing and get augmented by human journalists.
- mingabunga 9y ago
  That's where companies like Arria https://www.arria.com/ https://www.arria.com/ doing natural language generation step in so you can't tell the difference if it's machine or human generated. Well that's the promise.
dheera 9y ago
> "The corresponding low also paints a picture and suggests that the low is nothing but a 97.89% since 11/14/16." I can't gather any meaning from that statement, yet it has oddly specific details. Maybe it was a horribly sleep-deprived person in Wall Street at 2am and made a cut-and-paste error while half-asleep.
revmoo 9y ago
Those articles are all over the web on all sorts of throwaway made-up sites. They're absolutely computer generated. They make for really annoying search engine spam.
akhilcacharya 9y ago
This is definitely machine generated. http://www.npr.org/sections/money/2015/05/20/406484294/an-npr-reporter-raced-a-machine-to-write-a-news-story-who-won http://www.npr.org/sections/money/2015/05/20/406484294/an-np...
- DanBC 9y ago
  That's a great example, because I much prefer the robot version of the Denny article to the human created version.
  - brudgers 9y ago
    For me, neither was worth reading and since the machine generated version was shorter it was less not worth reading than the longer one...but the longer one contained the logical possibility of being worth reading whereas the machine written one was as good as it could possibly be. Or to put it another way, while it was not worth the human effort to write the story, it wasn't worth the CPU cycles to write the machine generated version either. The story was not worth writing or publishing or reading at all because nobody cares including the author (which is why a machine can write it).
    - TheSpiceIsLife 9y ago
      > The story was not worth writing or publishing or reading Of course, these are the wrong metrics. The correct metrics are: ad impressions vs. cost to generate content.
      - sametmax 9y ago
        Ad impressions read by who ? Triggering which action ?
      - anigbrowl 9y ago
        That's only for the publishing side. The reader's utility calculus matters too, and I agree with the other poster that both stories are garbage.
phreeza 9y ago
https://duckduckgo.com/?q=%22When+you+combine+the+technical+touch+points+we%E2%80%99ve+outlined+above https://duckduckgo.com/?q=%22When+you+combine+the+technical+... Seems to be at least some sort of copy and paste going on... edit: This is so bizarre, one of the sites has a section with editor "bios" but they read like some sort of very poor odesk/fiverr profiles, wouldn't be surprised if thats what they are... https://nystocknews.com/our-staff/ https://nystocknews.com/our-staff/
- dgacmu 9y ago
  The whole thing is full of rehashed phrases: (link to google for "A deeper exploration of the setup is sure to yield a clear picture"): https://www.google.com/search?q=%22A+deeper+exploration+of+the+setup+is+sure+to+yield+a+clearer+picture%22&oq=%22A+deeper+exploration+of+the+setup+is+sure+to+yield+a+clearer+picture%22&aqs=chrome..69i64j5.1631j0j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8 https://www.google.com/search?q=%22A+deeper+exploration+of+t... Craziness. Auto-generated soup to farm SEO?
- userbinator 9y ago
  This line from those "bios" caught my attention: I’d affection to help you with your written work, altering and substance needs! ...because I mentally "autocorrected" the latter half to "and mind-altering substance needs"... Looks like they used a "thesauriser" on it. Not hard to see love->affection, editing->altering, and content->substance. Of course, if you are under the influence of a mind-altering substance, you would probably not notice anything wrong with that page. ...and unfortunately, so would many people who aren't.
  - phreeza 9y ago
    Ha, and the "de-thesaurised" version of that phrase is indeed from this upwork profile! https://www.upwork.com/o/profiles/users/_~012388b8f7c8ed8aa2/ https://www.upwork.com/o/profiles/users/_~012388b8f7c8ed8aa2...
Shivetya 9y ago
I am curious though, will these systems have pen names? A simple name easy enough to recognize as machine written without the need for disclaimer? Could competition be more easily obtained between different companies based on which pen name attracts the most viewers? the one concern I have is someone has to give ths system enough information to create a story and what prevents a fake news machine?
- andai 9y ago
  I vote for them all to be called Writey McWriterson.
  - tripzilch 9y ago
    My vote is Botty McBotface :)
hellbanner 9y ago
"AP's robot journalists are writing their own stories now" https://www.theverge.com/2015/1/29/7939067/ap-journalism-automation-robots-financial-reporting https://www.theverge.com/2015/1/29/7939067/ap-journalism-aut...
elihu 9y ago
I'd guess that about a third to half of the "financial news" articles I see on finance.google.com are generated from some sort of template, with a script filling in the details. I'd love to see Google identify and remove these sites from their search results (and any sites that link to them), but I think they either don't think it's a high priority or they don't know how to solve the problem. What will be creepy is if the auto-generated story algorithms get good enough that you can't tell what's written by a human and what isn't, there will no longer a human filter between what some powerful institution wants a news article to say and what makes it into print. Most journalists have a sense of journalistic ethics or at least a reputation to defend; an algorithm has neither of those.
- jgalt212 9y ago
  Bloomberg has these articles as well. If a service that costs $20K a year is promoting these (and not removing), it's a safe bet "free" Google Finance will be showing more rather than less of these in the future.
ssivark 9y ago
From the article (mistakes highlighted): > Human news writers regularly point out that AIs tend to lack nuance and a _flare_ for language in the stories they churn out. That’s probably a _fare_ criticism [...] Maybe they used speech-to-text transcription for this, given that the mistakes are homophones? It seems very unlikely that either a human typing this, or a computerized system would make these mistakes (if it learns word associations from a corpus). PS: the article also claims to be human generated: > This story was not generated by an AI, but to be fair, I haven’t had my coffee yet. EDIT: Oops, I might have misunderstood which article you were referring to, since the reference was not placed next to "this".
- saurik 9y ago
  FWIW, I absolutely believe that a human would make those kinds of typos while typing... I myself didn't realize "flair for criticism" was spelled like that (and the top hit searching on Google for that, without quotes, is actually a book title using the other spelling, though it may very well have been a purposeful pun...). It would be one thing if those weren't themselves "correctly spelled words" (and so a text editor might catch it), but both "flare" and "fare" could easily slip by unnoticed. I will often even make much more interesting typos, where the word just "sounds sort of like the other word but no one would ever confuse the two", as I tend to speak to myself in my head as I type (and as I read) and I swear all language in my brain is at some point represented as audio... I'm not coming up with any examples right now, but trust me that when they come up they are incredibly strange.
  - TheSpiceIsLife 9y ago
    Only slightly tangential, have you come across the term eggcorn[1] before? I always get a chuckle out of thinking about it. 1. In linguistics, an eggcorn is an idiosyncratic substitution of a word or phrase for a word or words that sound similar or identical in the speaker's dialect (sometimes called oronyms). The new phrase introduces a meaning that is different from the original but plausible in the same context, such as "old-timers' disease" for "Alzheimer's disease". - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eggcorn https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eggcorn
- 9y ago
iak8god 9y ago
That "author" published 87 such articles on July 7 2017[0], and a total of over 8,500 so far this year[1]. [0] https://www.nystocknews.com/author/mack-tyler/page/9/ https://www.nystocknews.com/author/mack-tyler/page/9/ [1] https://www.nystocknews.com/author/mack-tyler/page/854/ https://www.nystocknews.com/author/mack-tyler/page/854/
- mikeyouse 9y ago
  As far as I can tell; None of the authors are real people, the website is registered behind a anonymization service, there is no company registered with their name, the address of their office doesn't exist, the phone number connects to a 'subscriber not in service'... If you look at their Google Ad ID, it was used in the past on the now defunct "TheSportsTruth.com" -- which looks like it primarily existed to shuffle people to a supplement site. From there, there are a ton of links to other random affiliate schemes with sports, 'internet marketing', etc. No sense outing anyone, but I believe I figured out who's behind a few dozen of this shitty sites. The NYStockNews site seems to make its money by referrals to some penny stock scam sites. It's crazy how much 'content' on the internet exists solely to get people to click on links to supplements & penny stock scams.
  - mrkrab 9y ago
    How did you find out that stuff of the google ad id? Especially associating it with past websites.
    - mikeyouse 9y ago
      In the source of every page with Google ads, there's a "Publisher ID" which is a unique identifier for the account. In the case of NYStockNews.com, it shows up as: > google_ad_client: "ca-pub-6009540024781990" From there, there are specialty services that keep track over time, otherwise, you can just search for the trailing digits on Google. When doing so for "6009540024781990", a few sites come up, GDPInsider.com - Another stock bot-written site, and then a dead link with a Google Cache: https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:Ccudn6ouybUJ:urlquery.net:443/report.php%3Fid%3D1491800213930+&cd=2&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us&lr=lang_en%7Clang_pt https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:Ccudn6... Using various other tools, you can see the domain registration information over time or ID which servers hosted it, or just find out who was linking to a domain earliest. Reddit is a great site for the latter. Often times, when a 'marketer' sets up a site like these, they immediately run to social media to try and promote it. If you can find the first time it's linked publicly, you can often find out who posted it. That last part is actually one of the ways they tied Ross Ulbricht to The Silk Road -- They found the first public mention of The Silk Road online (The post: https://www.shroomery.org/forums/showflat.php/Number/13860995 https://www.shroomery.org/forums/showflat.php/Number/1386099...) which was written by 'Altoid' and directed users to a Wordpress page that had been set up a few days earlier. They then found a series of posts on BitcoinTalk by 'Altoid' looking for an IT Pro in the Bitcoin community with instructions to email Ross.Ulbricht@gmail.com if they were interested in a job... He was doing deeply illegal stuff and couldn't be bothered to mask his ID, imagine how easy it is to find rando affiliate marketers.
nickdavidhaynes 9y ago
I work for Automated Insights, a company that makes a SaaS platform very similar to what's in the article. Here's an example "in the wild" of the content we produce - http://www.thenewstribune.com/news/business/article158774809.html http://www.thenewstribune.com/news/business/article158774809... Many of your criticisms are totally valid. Lots of the phrasing is awkward - even the lede is really bad ("Tesla, Inc. (TSLA) has been having a set of eventful trading activity"...wat). And it feels really deceptive to put a human byline on an automated article. We're pretty open about the fact that our solution to this problem is not "magical" at all [1, 2] - it's good, old-fashioned automation. This approach allows our customers to QA their content heavily before pushing it to production, which eliminates many of the problems with awkward/incorrect phrasing that people who rely more heavily on machine learning tend to run into. And the news articles we publish always have a note at the end saying that they were generated by Automated Insights, and don't include a human byline. There is real value in this type of reporting - a recent study [3] found that the articles we produce for less well-known publicly-traded companies has increased the trading volume for those companies. The idea is that, yes, the content is fairly formulaic, but there's now reporting on companies that had very little coverage before we existed. There are similar arguments for mass personalization work we've done for companies like Activision Yahoo - having prose that describes raw data (even if it is formulaic to an extent) is often better than not having prose. [1] https://automatedinsights.com/blog/the-state-of-artificial-intelligence https://automatedinsights.com/blog/the-state-of-artificial-i... [2] https://automatedinsights.com/blog/creating-great-automated-content https://automatedinsights.com/blog/creating-great-automated-... [3] https://insights.ap.org/industry-trends/study-news-automation-by-ap-increases-trading-in-financial-markets https://insights.ap.org/industry-trends/study-news-automatio...
- Borealid 9y ago
  I don't understand what value the prose provides over spending the same amount of effort producing clear, easy to read infographics. Instead of producing awkward and difficult-to-read English sentences, why not use the same content generator to produce completely accurate and easier to read dynamic data visualizations?
  - 9y ago

semperdark 9y ago

I've also noticed this on financial/stock news articles. I've seen a few of them use full 4-word names for corporations ("The Coca-Cola Company") dozens of times in one article, and multiple times per sentence.

dom0 9y ago
These are indeed frequently generated automatically.
fjdlwlv 9y ago
Yes, finance and sports and weather and other metrics reporting is already highly automated.
- lspress 9y ago
  Automated Insights https://automatedinsights.com https://automatedinsights.com - writes all the routine corporate earnings stories for Associated Press so they can cover more companies and let journalists actually investigate and write more nuanced pieces. Some earnings reports start with the software writing and get augmented by human journalists.
mingabunga 9y ago
That's where companies like Arria https://www.arria.com/ https://www.arria.com/ doing natural language generation step in so you can't tell the difference if it's machine or human generated. Well that's the promise.

dheera 9y ago

> "The corresponding low also paints a picture and suggests that the low is nothing but a 97.89% since 11/14/16." I can't gather any meaning from that statement, yet it has oddly specific details. Maybe it was a horribly sleep-deprived person in Wall Street at 2am and made a cut-and-paste error while half-asleep.

revmoo 9y ago

Those articles are all over the web on all sorts of throwaway made-up sites. They're absolutely computer generated. They make for really annoying search engine spam.

akhilcacharya 9y ago

This is definitely machine generated. http://www.npr.org/sections/money/2015/05/20/406484294/an-npr-reporter-raced-a-machine-to-write-a-news-story-who-won http://www.npr.org/sections/money/2015/05/20/406484294/an-np...

DanBC 9y ago
That's a great example, because I much prefer the robot version of the Denny article to the human created version.
- brudgers 9y ago
  For me, neither was worth reading and since the machine generated version was shorter it was less not worth reading than the longer one...but the longer one contained the logical possibility of being worth reading whereas the machine written one was as good as it could possibly be. Or to put it another way, while it was not worth the human effort to write the story, it wasn't worth the CPU cycles to write the machine generated version either. The story was not worth writing or publishing or reading at all because nobody cares including the author (which is why a machine can write it).
  - TheSpiceIsLife 9y ago
    > The story was not worth writing or publishing or reading Of course, these are the wrong metrics. The correct metrics are: ad impressions vs. cost to generate content.
    - sametmax 9y ago
      Ad impressions read by who ? Triggering which action ?
    - anigbrowl 9y ago
      That's only for the publishing side. The reader's utility calculus matters too, and I agree with the other poster that both stories are garbage.

phreeza 9y ago

https://duckduckgo.com/?q=%22When+you+combine+the+technical+touch+points+we%E2%80%99ve+outlined+above https://duckduckgo.com/?q=%22When+you+combine+the+technical+... Seems to be at least some sort of copy and paste going on... edit: This is so bizarre, one of the sites has a section with editor "bios" but they read like some sort of very poor odesk/fiverr profiles, wouldn't be surprised if thats what they are... https://nystocknews.com/our-staff/ https://nystocknews.com/our-staff/

dgacmu 9y ago
The whole thing is full of rehashed phrases: (link to google for "A deeper exploration of the setup is sure to yield a clear picture"): https://www.google.com/search?q=%22A+deeper+exploration+of+the+setup+is+sure+to+yield+a+clearer+picture%22&oq=%22A+deeper+exploration+of+the+setup+is+sure+to+yield+a+clearer+picture%22&aqs=chrome..69i64j5.1631j0j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8 https://www.google.com/search?q=%22A+deeper+exploration+of+t... Craziness. Auto-generated soup to farm SEO?
userbinator 9y ago
This line from those "bios" caught my attention: I’d affection to help you with your written work, altering and substance needs! ...because I mentally "autocorrected" the latter half to "and mind-altering substance needs"... Looks like they used a "thesauriser" on it. Not hard to see love->affection, editing->altering, and content->substance. Of course, if you are under the influence of a mind-altering substance, you would probably not notice anything wrong with that page. ...and unfortunately, so would many people who aren't.
- phreeza 9y ago
  Ha, and the "de-thesaurised" version of that phrase is indeed from this upwork profile! https://www.upwork.com/o/profiles/users/_~012388b8f7c8ed8aa2/ https://www.upwork.com/o/profiles/users/_~012388b8f7c8ed8aa2...

Shivetya 9y ago

I am curious though, will these systems have pen names? A simple name easy enough to recognize as machine written without the need for disclaimer? Could competition be more easily obtained between different companies based on which pen name attracts the most viewers? the one concern I have is someone has to give ths system enough information to create a story and what prevents a fake news machine?

andai 9y ago
I vote for them all to be called Writey McWriterson.
- tripzilch 9y ago
  My vote is Botty McBotface :)

hellbanner 9y ago

"AP's robot journalists are writing their own stories now" https://www.theverge.com/2015/1/29/7939067/ap-journalism-automation-robots-financial-reporting https://www.theverge.com/2015/1/29/7939067/ap-journalism-aut...

elihu 9y ago

I'd guess that about a third to half of the "financial news" articles I see on finance.google.com are generated from some sort of template, with a script filling in the details. I'd love to see Google identify and remove these sites from their search results (and any sites that link to them), but I think they either don't think it's a high priority or they don't know how to solve the problem. What will be creepy is if the auto-generated story algorithms get good enough that you can't tell what's written by a human and what isn't, there will no longer a human filter between what some powerful institution wants a news article to say and what makes it into print. Most journalists have a sense of journalistic ethics or at least a reputation to defend; an algorithm has neither of those.

jgalt212 9y ago
Bloomberg has these articles as well. If a service that costs $20K a year is promoting these (and not removing), it's a safe bet "free" Google Finance will be showing more rather than less of these in the future.

ssivark 9y ago

From the article (mistakes highlighted): > Human news writers regularly point out that AIs tend to lack nuance and a _flare_ for language in the stories they churn out. That’s probably a _fare_ criticism [...] Maybe they used speech-to-text transcription for this, given that the mistakes are homophones? It seems very unlikely that either a human typing this, or a computerized system would make these mistakes (if it learns word associations from a corpus). PS: the article also claims to be human generated: > This story was not generated by an AI, but to be fair, I haven’t had my coffee yet. EDIT: Oops, I might have misunderstood which article you were referring to, since the reference was not placed next to "this".

saurik 9y ago
FWIW, I absolutely believe that a human would make those kinds of typos while typing... I myself didn't realize "flair for criticism" was spelled like that (and the top hit searching on Google for that, without quotes, is actually a book title using the other spelling, though it may very well have been a purposeful pun...). It would be one thing if those weren't themselves "correctly spelled words" (and so a text editor might catch it), but both "flare" and "fare" could easily slip by unnoticed. I will often even make much more interesting typos, where the word just "sounds sort of like the other word but no one would ever confuse the two", as I tend to speak to myself in my head as I type (and as I read) and I swear all language in my brain is at some point represented as audio... I'm not coming up with any examples right now, but trust me that when they come up they are incredibly strange.
- TheSpiceIsLife 9y ago
  Only slightly tangential, have you come across the term eggcorn[1] before? I always get a chuckle out of thinking about it. 1. In linguistics, an eggcorn is an idiosyncratic substitution of a word or phrase for a word or words that sound similar or identical in the speaker's dialect (sometimes called oronyms). The new phrase introduces a meaning that is different from the original but plausible in the same context, such as "old-timers' disease" for "Alzheimer's disease". - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eggcorn https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eggcorn
9y ago

iak8god 9y ago

That "author" published 87 such articles on July 7 2017[0], and a total of over 8,500 so far this year[1]. [0] https://www.nystocknews.com/author/mack-tyler/page/9/ https://www.nystocknews.com/author/mack-tyler/page/9/ [1] https://www.nystocknews.com/author/mack-tyler/page/854/ https://www.nystocknews.com/author/mack-tyler/page/854/

mikeyouse 9y ago
As far as I can tell; None of the authors are real people, the website is registered behind a anonymization service, there is no company registered with their name, the address of their office doesn't exist, the phone number connects to a 'subscriber not in service'... If you look at their Google Ad ID, it was used in the past on the now defunct "TheSportsTruth.com" -- which looks like it primarily existed to shuffle people to a supplement site. From there, there are a ton of links to other random affiliate schemes with sports, 'internet marketing', etc. No sense outing anyone, but I believe I figured out who's behind a few dozen of this shitty sites. The NYStockNews site seems to make its money by referrals to some penny stock scam sites. It's crazy how much 'content' on the internet exists solely to get people to click on links to supplements & penny stock scams.
- mrkrab 9y ago
  How did you find out that stuff of the google ad id? Especially associating it with past websites.
  - mikeyouse 9y ago
    In the source of every page with Google ads, there's a "Publisher ID" which is a unique identifier for the account. In the case of NYStockNews.com, it shows up as: > google_ad_client: "ca-pub-6009540024781990" From there, there are specialty services that keep track over time, otherwise, you can just search for the trailing digits on Google. When doing so for "6009540024781990", a few sites come up, GDPInsider.com - Another stock bot-written site, and then a dead link with a Google Cache: https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:Ccudn6ouybUJ:urlquery.net:443/report.php%3Fid%3D1491800213930+&cd=2&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us&lr=lang_en%7Clang_pt https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:Ccudn6... Using various other tools, you can see the domain registration information over time or ID which servers hosted it, or just find out who was linking to a domain earliest. Reddit is a great site for the latter. Often times, when a 'marketer' sets up a site like these, they immediately run to social media to try and promote it. If you can find the first time it's linked publicly, you can often find out who posted it. That last part is actually one of the ways they tied Ross Ulbricht to The Silk Road -- They found the first public mention of The Silk Road online (The post: https://www.shroomery.org/forums/showflat.php/Number/13860995 https://www.shroomery.org/forums/showflat.php/Number/1386099...) which was written by 'Altoid' and directed users to a Wordpress page that had been set up a few days earlier. They then found a series of posts on BitcoinTalk by 'Altoid' looking for an IT Pro in the Bitcoin community with instructions to email Ross.Ulbricht@gmail.com if they were interested in a job... He was doing deeply illegal stuff and couldn't be bothered to mask his ID, imagine how easy it is to find rando affiliate marketers.

nickdavidhaynes 9y ago

I work for Automated Insights, a company that makes a SaaS platform very similar to what's in the article. Here's an example "in the wild" of the content we produce - http://www.thenewstribune.com/news/business/article158774809.html http://www.thenewstribune.com/news/business/article158774809... Many of your criticisms are totally valid. Lots of the phrasing is awkward - even the lede is really bad ("Tesla, Inc. (TSLA) has been having a set of eventful trading activity"...wat). And it feels really deceptive to put a human byline on an automated article. We're pretty open about the fact that our solution to this problem is not "magical" at all [1, 2] - it's good, old-fashioned automation. This approach allows our customers to QA their content heavily before pushing it to production, which eliminates many of the problems with awkward/incorrect phrasing that people who rely more heavily on machine learning tend to run into. And the news articles we publish always have a note at the end saying that they were generated by Automated Insights, and don't include a human byline. There is real value in this type of reporting - a recent study [3] found that the articles we produce for less well-known publicly-traded companies has increased the trading volume for those companies. The idea is that, yes, the content is fairly formulaic, but there's now reporting on companies that had very little coverage before we existed. There are similar arguments for mass personalization work we've done for companies like Activision Yahoo - having prose that describes raw data (even if it is formulaic to an extent) is often better than not having prose. [1] https://automatedinsights.com/blog/the-state-of-artificial-intelligence https://automatedinsights.com/blog/the-state-of-artificial-i... [2] https://automatedinsights.com/blog/creating-great-automated-content https://automatedinsights.com/blog/creating-great-automated-... [3] https://insights.ap.org/industry-trends/study-news-automation-by-ap-increases-trading-in-financial-markets https://insights.ap.org/industry-trends/study-news-automatio...

Borealid 9y ago
I don't understand what value the prose provides over spending the same amount of effort producing clear, easy to read infographics. Instead of producing awkward and difficult-to-read English sentences, why not use the same content generator to produce completely accurate and easier to read dynamic data visualizations?
- 9y ago