3 ms·

You know what, it's not really that much better. It's better, but it's not so much better that I can really tell that one is written by a computer. If you fac

by fnid 17y ago

You know what, it's not really that much better. It's better, but it's not so much better that I can really tell that one is written by a computer. If you factor in the costs, time to market, and other factors, I can easily see the automated version winning out in the long run. I'm sure similar comparisons were made between robots on factory lines and people as well, but the cost differentials really push toward automation. Perhaps robots will write the initial article and then hand it off to a person for the flair.

idoh 17y ago
Really, you can't tell? To me the difference in quality is really far apart. Just look at the first paragraph - which one makes you want to read more? "Things looked bleak for the Angels when they trailed by two runs in the ninth inning, but Los Angeles recovered thanks to a key single from Vladimir Guerrero to pull out a 7-6 victory over the Boston Red Sox at Fenway Park on Sunday. Guerrero drove in two Angels runners. He went 2-4 at the plate." versus "Torii Hunter emerged from the visitors' clubhouse at Fenway Park to spray champagne over the fans and family gathered there. Erick Aybar did him one better, handing over bottles of bubbly to those who came from California to see the Los Angeles Angels go for the sweep. History gave no reason to hope for such a celebration."
- nswanberg 17y ago
  I agree. I don't follow baseball, but I'd imagine there's just as much, if not more, story in the unmeasured events between the plays as there is to be told when they occur. I do follow pro cycling, however. And even if riders' exact position and biometrics throughout a race were recorded, analyzed, and commented on by such a program, the resulting story could be accurate yet would likely be utterly boring compared to an experienced commentator's narrative of the facts combined with the less quantifiable atmosphere of the course, the conditions, and the crowds.

by fnid 17y ago

idoh 17y ago

Really, you can't tell? To me the difference in quality is really far apart. Just look at the first paragraph - which one makes you want to read more? "Things looked bleak for the Angels when they trailed by two runs in the ninth inning, but Los Angeles recovered thanks to a key single from Vladimir Guerrero to pull out a 7-6 victory over the Boston Red Sox at Fenway Park on Sunday. Guerrero drove in two Angels runners. He went 2-4 at the plate." versus "Torii Hunter emerged from the visitors' clubhouse at Fenway Park to spray champagne over the fans and family gathered there. Erick Aybar did him one better, handing over bottles of bubbly to those who came from California to see the Los Angeles Angels go for the sweep. History gave no reason to hope for such a celebration."

nswanberg 17y ago
I agree. I don't follow baseball, but I'd imagine there's just as much, if not more, story in the unmeasured events between the plays as there is to be told when they occur. I do follow pro cycling, however. And even if riders' exact position and biometrics throughout a race were recorded, analyzed, and commented on by such a program, the resulting story could be accurate yet would likely be utterly boring compared to an experienced commentator's narrative of the facts combined with the less quantifiable atmosphere of the course, the conditions, and the crowds.