pull down to refresh

This type of transcription existed in the community, but unfortunately it didn't catch on. By that I mean it didn't have to be done by you. And why do you need to summarize a video like this, when faced with situations like this the most common question I ask myself is whether it's worth it?
I don't care about appearances.
I misunderstood that you could use summarize to make it more presentable in an email or other type of communication. That's my criticism, but not yours.
100 sats \ 0 replies \ @optimism 9h
This type of transcription existed in the community
It did, but why would I waste another human's time with something that can be automated?
And why do you need to summarize a video like this, when faced with situations like this the most common question I ask myself is whether it's worth it?
For example: nowadays in discussions, people will sometimes link you a 5 hour video or a podcast from some influencer that "proves their point". I am often in situations where I have to defend against all this nonsense for the "dayjob", so I just run it through transcription and grep through the text to find what was exactly said about a subject, and then can precisely seek a point in the video if I need more context.
It's a protective measure to somewhat balance the scales within Brandolini's Law, it works for now, but I fear it won't work for long, because we will just be confronted with ever-larger floods of slop.
I'm not insensitive to your proposed solution of just not using it and thus finding other ways of dealing with it - eventually we'll likely have to - but as a stopgap measure, it's a good experiment to find out how long this will work for.
I misunderstood that you could use summarize to make it more presentable in an email or other type of communication.
Oh! No, I don't need slop in my emails and I generally don't publish any AI output, unless it's test results or a joke.
reply