• Lem Jukes@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    25 days ago

    Guess what you can also read? A transcript of the video dingus. Also there’s a source listed in the description, guess what it is? An article.

    • luciferofastora@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      25 days ago

      And a good day to you too. Not sure why you felt the need to be insulting, but anyway.

      A transcript of the video

      Would you happen to have one handy? Or are these autogenerated these days. Are they better than the autogenerated CCs?

      Also there’s a source listed in the description, guess what it is? An article.

      Yeah, which would require me to click on YT in the first place, which is already what I want to avoid due to a limited mobile data plan and YT being a wonderful drain on that.

      I’m just trying to push the point that “just watch the original video instead” isn’t as great a solution for everyone as some people make it out to be.

      • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        25 days ago

        Dude they matched your tone if you thought that that was insulting that’s because your original comment was insulting

        How about you be less of a dick and people won’t respond to you in a way that you don’t like

        • luciferofastora@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          25 days ago

          In my experience, YT would still end up loading a section of the video along with previews of suggestion. Maybe that has changed.

      • Lem Jukes@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        25 days ago

        Sorry I was trying to match the level of insulting tone of your reply, I guess I went too mean.

        Technology Connections actually has great CC and Transcripts as I believe Alec adds them directly after proofing an as aired script after his final edit. But I am only guessing based on the level of quality I’ve seen in both after years of watching his channel.

        Your point kind of falls apart though because the subject at interest here is not ‘battery testers’ it’s about a crappy ‘news’ site generating a two paragraph summary of a YouTube video and screencaping images from said video in order to generate ad revenue with minimal effort and dubious ethics.

        That freebooted content being from a longstanding creator of high quality, educational, video content. If you’re so interested in the subject and want to learn more about the subject why not look for one, or even just ask? Instead of trying to make some lame high horse comment in defense of some crappy ai text that only exists to mooch off of actual people’s work.

        Not to mention you didn’t even ask for a source you wanted a ‘content description’ which is like you came in here and went ‘I don’t want video, I want ai slop describing the video.’

        Also, you’re a dingus.

        • luciferofastora@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          25 days ago

          Sorry I was trying to match the level of insulting tone of your reply, I guess I went too mean.

          Eh, I’d be a hypocrite to point fingers for that. All good.

          Technology Connections actually has great CC and Transcripts as I believe Alec adds them directly after proofing an as aired script after his final edit.

          I don’t know this specific creator, or many YT tech creators really, since YT isn’t really my main haunt (I’ve tried to explaing that elsewhere, but it boils down to “I rarely have the mental ability to sit and watch them”) and I genuinely prefer articles.

          The video having good CC doesn’t solve most of my problems, unfortunately. It’s a good thing to have, don’t get me wrong, just doesn’t help me a whole lot.

          it’s about a crappy ‘news’ site generating a two paragraph summary of a YouTube video and screencaping images from said video in order to generate ad revenue with minimal effort and dubious ethics

          I’ll grant the dubious ethics point. That subtext didn’t parse for me. My focus was on the fact that the article, being a textual medium, is more useful to me.

          I’m mostly upset at the prevalence of video content and the tendency to push people away from text, like “This guy has a great video” is a useful response to “I’m looking for an article”. This topic set me off, but my frustration is independent of the specific context. I’ve had it happen often enough to make it a sore spot, but that isn’t strictly the original comment’s fault.

          If you’re so interested in the subject and want to learn more about the subject why not look for one, or even just ask?

          It’s not a deep interest so much as a passing “stumble across something interesting”, so I wouldn’t necessarily seek out content on the topic. But if I were offered an essily digestible format, I’d be curious enough to consume it.

          I agree that it would be better not to post cheap ripoffs, but they fill a market gap that I’m the audience for. The solution isn’t to complain about the moochers filling the gap, but to fill the gap yourself. I’m not defending sloppy AI text specifically, but the concept of converting content to a different medium.

          If the content creators don’t want to cater to those who prefer that other medium - perfectly fine, that’s their prerogative. But to then complain if someone else adapts your content to a medium you didn’t want to, that’s what rubs me the wrong way.

          Also, you’re a dingus.

          Fair enough. My phrasing was harsh and born of a frustration that I didn’t really convey.