CNET Has Been Quietly Publishing AI-Written Articles for Months
"ChatGPT, he says, doesn’t have the ability to describe the feelings seen on a player’s face when they win the World Cup,"<p>Oh piffle. My wife and I roll our eyes and mock the sports reporters when they run down to the field and ask the question "How does it feel to have won the $CHAMPIONSHIP?" "Oh man, it's... it's just so incredible, you know, you work all your life to reach this height and... here I am... it's just... <i>sniffle</i> it's really amazing. I have a really great team and I'd like to say HI MOM and... just.. oh man..." "We'll let you go join the celebration. There you have it, $OTHER_ANNOUNCER."<p>(Our favorite is: "Hey, $COACH, what do you plan to do to win this game?" "Well, you know, that's a good question, and we've got a plan we're going to execute to, you know, go out there and play strong, we're gonna try to, you know, score points and, uh, prevent the other team from scoring points. We're pretty confident that if we can execute that plan we're going to win." In fairness, sometimes the answer is better than that. But a lot of the times, if you think about what they just said, that's what it amounts to without any particular loss. After all, even if they have a good answer, they're not terribly interested in giving it to you before the game....)<p>I mean, I get it, I'm not so cold hearted as to not understand why they ask the question. It just doesn't happen to speak to us. But I would rate it more on the easy-mode side of sports writing, way easier than, say, being accurate about statistics or being correct about what strategy a team needs to pursue against another team for victory or what strategy they're going to pursue.<p>Extremely, <i>extremely</i> stereotyped responses. Can't hardly be wrong, it's not like saying "excitedly" instead of "energetically" is going to be the difference between accurate and inaccurate. Easy mode for a transformer architecture.