KrAzY3 wrote:dhsilv2 wrote:KrAzY3 wrote:Well, if we're talking about training an AI just to summarize box scores I think that can be done effectively. Then again, you can already make templates and do roughly that anyway. ___ scored ___ points in a game against ___. I
I'm just trying to drive home the point that being correct and accurate is the worst thing AI can do. For movies, art, songs, etc... there is amazing potential. But news? Reporting? Getting that from an AI that won't even know when it's lying would be a big issue potentially. So any "reporting" done by AI would require strict parameters and strict data input to the point that I'm not sure why you'd bother using an AI anyway.
Think about what CGI did to models and hand animation in movies. It's this.. but all over. Eventually you will be able to have books written for you instantly, then entire movies and video games custom made for you.
The AI could breakdown for you that a Curry 3 off a back door cut trigged a 10-0 run. That Draymond challenged 4 critical shots at the rim down the run. That the warriors broke the jazz down using pick and rolls in the 4th quarter against this two man lineup. It could with incredible detail explain the high leverage plays to fans reading. I get that scraping the web for facts could be a challenge, but here you can give the AI the full details of watching a game with a higher level of detail than any human could process. From there you could plug in the post game interviews if you needed quotes from players or coaches to add color or even shape how the AI uses that detail and data.
Well I can go back and forth a bit more on this, but all I can really say in regard to Chat GPT, or Midjourney, or Stable Diffusion, is that they are not even trained to work that way. They specifically don't tend to copy, they are given data, this goes into the neural net, and then the output is based on AI's understanding and interpretation of that data. The problem is it's childlike in many ways in terms of know what's what. So in the art I generate for example, it routinely does things like fail to place earrings on ears, or blends hair with ears, or puts weird inexplicable objects here or there, or gives a hand 7 deformed fingers, etc...
So you imagine it doing that with something specific like a play Curry runs at a specific point and you actually get the myriad of ways it could incorrectly describe it.
I wouldn't expect it to get it right from the get go. But this is all reasonable given time and enough machine learning.
















