2 ms·
"That would never have been possible using humans" That would have been more expensive using humans. Factual reporting is fairly trivial to automate. Add some
by PeterStuer 7y ago
"That would never have been possible using humans"
That would have been more expensive using humans.
Factual reporting is fairly trivial to automate. Add some language generation and you can even make it sound less dry.
More difficult is adding local contextualization and the impact of e.g. specific local factors that might have had an influence on the vote outcome.
Implying 'the computer' is doing anything here that a dedicated human could not is just bad communication at best and utter lies at worst.
- M2Ys4U 7y ago>"That would never have been possible using humans" > >That would have been more expensive using humans. The BBC has a fixed income, if something is too expensive it's functionally impossible for them to do.
- jlg23 7y agoThat's something that should be spelt out in the article. Also, if one has the resources to proofread all articles, how much more expensive would it have been to have humans write such trivial texts? The data is there, writing an article like those takes maybe two minutes?
- iudqnolq 7y agoAnd still has to be proofread afterwards?