4 ms·
First to publish matters, but GPT-3 is neither necessary nor sufficient to achieve that. If you're producing fake news related to a press conference, speed of c
by notahacker 4y ago
First to publish matters, but GPT-3 is neither necessary nor sufficient to achieve that. If you're producing fake news related to a press conference, speed of content generation is entirely unimportant because you don't have to wait for the press conference to start to write the fake article/update/tweet. If you care about fidelity to the message of the press conference, I don't see many situations in which a human who has anticipated the likely message(s) of the conference and therefore has pre-drafted paragraphs about "striking a conciliatory tone" and "confirmed the reversal of the policy" ready to select and combine with a choice quote or two as soon as they're uttered isn't significantly better (and as quick as) GPT-type models prompted by the speech-to-text of the press conference. Sure, more reliable publications will want to stick more validation and at least wait for the conference to finish before summarising its message steps in the way, but those apply to bots as well as journalists (or not, for the publications that prioritise being first over being right).
- NoMAD76 4y agoYou have a solid point, but I wasn't talking abut summarizing or excerpt from a press release (those are anyway handed as press-kits before with all NDA agreements and so on). Real human journalists have a delay of about 1m before making a short tweet. Funny (or not), something similar was in the "live update" article page in less than 10s. Including photo(s). I was on quite a lot of tech-conferences/live events and earned a decent living then as an independent tech journalist (but then I got bored and really it was a 1-man-show). Another personal observation (from field), that was not happening prior to 2010-2012, the years we all got Siri, Cortana.. You can make the dots and dashes.