Says the CEO of HarperCollins on AI:
"One idea is a “talking book,” where a book sits atop a large language model, allowing readers to converse with an AI facsimile of its author."
Please, just make it stop, somebody.
https://www.publishersweekly.com/pw/by-topic/industry-news/publisher-news/article/96711-harpercollins-ceo-brian-murray-on-hot-print-book-sales-and-the-use-of-ai.html
"One idea is a “talking book,” where a book sits atop a large language model, allowing readers to converse with an AI facsimile of its author."
Please, just make it stop, somebody.
https://www.publishersweekly.com/pw/by-topic/industry-news/publisher-news/article/96711-harpercollins-ceo-brian-murray-on-hot-print-book-sales-and-the-use-of-ai.html
Comments
It's insulting how much they think we can be fooled by a substitute for genuine connection and conversation. If I wanted an exchange of made-up dialogue, I'd write it myself. It's called a book. Maybe you've heard of it.
Unless medically necessary, there really is no point.
Or just steal from authors' IP. Whatevs.
this isnt one of them
take it out of the hands of corporate bros who just want to make slop
The bottom line is the bottom line. "Trickle-down economics", to most, was supposed to make us think we'd be rewarded in the end by policies that enriched the rich.
But to these guys, any trickle is a leak in their money bucket.
Unfortunately, the term “AI” has been completely corrupted by pushing LLMs & img gen.
again the problem is dumb tech bros misusing it
"Who is Jenna Simpson?"
"Jenna Simpson was killed brutally by Carter Franklin, the real serial killer and love interest of the protagonist, at the end of the first book."
or the algorithm
But apparently it’s so useless this is the best they can come up with. Ripping off an Neal Stephenson idea, poorly
Do you think you would interested in that? 🥺
Now it’s “The author’s mouldering corpse is being made to dance like a macabre puppet by the robotic hand up its ass”.
"Hello. You aren't a Negro, are you?"
"The CEO would emphasize the importance of balancing technological advancements with human insight and creativity to ensure AI enhances rather than diminishes the value of the publishing industry."
Maybe CEOs will be the first to be replaced.
"More coming in than going out? Great, job done."
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/06/13/style/now-you-can-read-the-classics-with-ai-powered-expert-guides.html?smid=nytcore-ios-share&referringSource=articleShare
b) At least half of the folks I follow on social media are authors whose books I like; it's not difficult to converse with the ACTUAL authors, so fake ones are doubly not needed.
Let’s belittle and downplay how vital he and his job are, and how easily he can be replaced by AI.
They all suck.
They don’t have the autonomy to seek out fact and wisdom, and are therefore only pale imitations of the people who feed them “relevant info.”
Get it together, @harpercollins.bsky.social.
We have, over the last 20 years, hollowed out the idea that you could move to a city and get an entry level job that would be your foot in the door in publishing or journalism. The rents have doubled since 2009, the pay has dropped 20%, and now those entry level jobs are internships.
Book-"what the fuck???"
What does he even mean "sits atop?" Is he talking about a RAG system? If so, in what possible way is it an AI facsimile of the author?
The real and practical ideas are likely locked in some lower level employee, being ignored.
Having a conversation with Mark Twain would be interesting, and it would be entertaining to call Ayn Rand a selfish, hypocritical cunt.
"Hey chatgpt, please provide another bad idea for how we can shoehorn LLMs into our business so we don't look like the worthless middlemen we are."
without the actual thought behind them to know if they have any relationship to "reality" or whether they sound like good ideas or bad ideas.
"For whom does the bell toll? For these GREAT BLACK FRIDAY DEALS AT SEARS!"
I order a drill to reenact the ending of Pi. 40% off.
author?
Not all of them, obviously. But a notable number.
So, the more money and power, the less empathy.
Unlike Dolly Parton who started out poor. She's basically the example of "You don't get rich by giving away money."
But she's really one of the few exceptions I can think off.
https://www.ted.com/talks/paul_piff_does_money_make_you_mean?subtitle=en&lng=de&geo=de
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2001/dec/21/voluntarysector.fundraising
https://www.independent.co.uk/money/poorer-areas-most-charitable-as-record-ps13-9bn-donated-in-2023-report-says-b2517946.html
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-wealth-reduces-compassion/
Money is power and with power, they face no consequences. Those born into it are raised to see themselves as superior.
That should be the *first* job replaced by automation.
https://youtu.be/R_beiTwWc7Q?si=T1vzsfTpYTmXE3Vg