Question We're working on a button you can click to have AI summarize long posts - Do we want that?

[Tefka]

I'm working on a button below posts that you can click, if a post is egregiously long, that will have OpenAI condense a summary and spit out a shortened summary for the reader in a dismissable overlay.

Posts must be more than 400 words to qualify for the button to be clickable.

Would you use this?

 

[Kitter Bitters]

Honestly, yes. Especially for the posts that go really long in discussions.

 

[Scavera]

I very much reject the idea of people having a hotkey that can immediately throw my writings into the torment-nexus.
It's one of those things that would make me leave the site.

 

[Manti Wyrvhor]

Yea I agree with Scavera

 

[Kyric]

"400 words"

"egregiously long"

Bro, what the fuck are you people doing here if you don't want to read or write?

EDIT: No thanks! : )

 

[Kitter Bitters]

"400 words"

"egregiously long"

Bro, what the fuck are you people doing here if you don't want to read or write?

EDIT: No thanks! : )

To be fair some people might not read very well. They put all their effort into reading one or two posts they might have nothing left that day so this tool could help them get more involved.

Plus nobody has to push the button who doesn't want to so whats the harm?

 

[Kyric]

To be fair some people might not read very well. They put all their effort into reading one or two posts they might have nothing left that day so this tool could help them get more involved.

Plus nobody has to push the button who doesn't want to so whats the harm?

You know what? Fair enough.

I've said before AI for accessibility reasons is a good thing. I don't personally think that this is an application the site needs, but I can't argue with you here.

 

[Sophia of House Marr]

To be fair some people might not read very well. They put all their effort into reading one or two posts they might have nothing left that day so this tool could help them get more involved.

Plus nobody has to push the button who doesn't want to so whats the harm?

Kitter with a home run, bet. Some posts are 1500 words minimum, and that might be a lot for certain people to digest, no matter how hard they try. I think anything that makes the site more accessible for everyone is a good thing.

 

[Rik Perris]

Nope. I read books way longer than that. 1k to 2k words isn't even a small book. Maybe a short story.

For all that we might roll our eyes about long posts, I still read 'em. I feel like I'd miss some nuance (which can make a huge difference!) if I just went with a summary.

 

[Darth Virelia]

Yea, a summary can be good but Rik Perris has a point. The tool ain't perfect.

Again, use the tool responsibly.

 

[Xuko Pagoi]

Short answer: No.

Long answer: Nooooooo (If folks already find this useful then they're doing something like this already using CTRL + C and CTRL + V., plus there's other accessibility tools such as text-to-speech and such. I've also no desire to have my writing used to further train AI without my consent.)

 

[Manti Wyrvhor]

To clarify my stance, I'm generally do not like the idea of going through the work of phrasing my sentences as my character including their thoughts, words, and actions for it to be strained through a pasta strainer into a more basic version that is definitively not my character. It just feels icky to me? Maybe disrespectful? And that's not including the fact that the AI could misinterpret what I'm trying to say.

 

[Darth Virelia]

To clarify my stance, I'm generally do not like the idea of going through the work of phrasing my sentences as my character including their thoughts, words, and actions for it to be strained through a pasta strainer into a more basic version. It just feels icky to me? Maybe disrespectful? And that's not including the fact that the AI could misinterpret what I'm trying to say.

I think that's the big concern, it isn't AI summarizing but rather it failing to summarize correctly.

If AI interpreted our work 100% as we desired, it wouldn't be a problem. But that's nigh impossible atm. So while summarizing posts can help, it should probably be with some sort of disclaimer.

 

[Aether Verd]

Solidly 50-50.

On one hand, it's pushing Chaos' writing into the OpenAi meatgrinder and lord knows feeding the machine our smut isn't grand.

On the other hand, I've spent many years hearing the complaints of "these posts in this group thread are so long, I can't keep up" or "these posts are so long that it burns me out just replying to one." Not everyone is going to verbalize these struggles, lest they be judged for daring to get cognitive load from reading 400 words of ego per post, but it's a reality.

I'm nutty enough to read the ego regardless.

 

[Zark San Tekka]

I support this.

 

[Kaila Irons]

I think that's the big concern, it isn't AI summarizing but rather it failing to summarize correctly.

If AI interpreted our work 100% as we desired, it wouldn't be a problem. But that's nigh impossible atm. So while summarizing posts can help, it should probably be with some sort of disclaimer.

THANK YOU! this is one of my biggest complaints about summaries, I've had to correct ppl so many times after their AI misinterpreted simple 200-300 word posts lol

 

[Darth Virelia]

THANK YOU! this is one of my biggest complaints about summaries, I've had to correct ppl so many times after their AI misinterpreted simple 200-300 word posts lol

I will say, lack of sleep does the same thing.

Maybe I need to fix my sleep schedule.

 

[Damien Dooku]

My biggest concern is whether an ai-provided summary would take precedent over the original post, in the case of a third-party needing to judge or mediate something being misconstrued or just left out of the summary due to a lack of nuance.

Folks can already run a post off-site in AI and spit out a summary, so this feels unnecessary, and to be quite frank just incentivizes laziness in a dying hobby that's presumably centered around our shared enjoyment of collective writing. If someone doesn't have the attention span or time to read the posts of people they choose to engage with, then what are we really doing?

You can always approach your fellow writer in dms or whatever chat medium you've got for clarification & a more direct summary from the person you're involved with. That also prevents you from losing out on any nuance within that person's writing itself, since you're getting an answer straight from the source.

I dunno man. As someone who wants to see this hobby not die out, this one doesn't feel very cash money.

 

[Ran Serys]

No. Suffer like the rest of us. Jk.

Seriously though "egregiously long" should be like 2k of words. Also not everybody is cool with having an AI analyze and summarize their words and/or writing style without their consent.

Like others have said or alluded to, I thought we were here to write fun stories and collaborate with each other. Do you wanna' collaborate with me or a machine? If you want the machine, you can go do that, but I wanna' collaborate with the person, flaws and all.

I respect and am honored by the folk that choose to share their creativity with me this way, and would hope that you would respect and honor me the same. Don't plug my stuff into a machine and say "Yeah, just tell me what they wrote. I don't care enough to read it all."

Sorry if this comes off jerky. I'm just really passionate about this. I don't support the use of AI in creative spaces unless it's for accessibility reasons.

 

[Sophia of House Marr]

It's funny to me that ya'll have hate for AI so much but you've got a lot of experience with it messing up your writing. Let's not even start with all the AI art up in here.

Oh, but it's different! Is it? Really?

I see a lot of screw the little guy and I don't trust people to do their jobs if they have a summary.

Smh.