post by [deleted]
This is a link post for
Comments sorted by top scores.
comment by rohinmshah ·
2021-05-04T21:20:18.867Z · LW(p) · GW(p)
Fyi, I personally dislike audio as a means of communicating information, and so I probably won't be summarizing these for the Alignment Newsletter while they don't have transcripts.
This is not a request for transcripts. Treat it more like an external constraint of the world, that the Alignment Newsletter happens to have a strong bias against audio- or video-only content. This is also not a guarantee that I will summarize it if it does have a transcript.
Fyi, my guess is that even if it did have transcripts I would usually not summarize it, because I personally am not that interested in forecasting timelines.Replies from: mtrazzi
↑ comment by Michaël Trazzi (mtrazzi) ·
2021-05-04T22:19:34.616Z · LW(p) · GW(p)
Thanks for the feedback! I haven't really estimated how long it would take to have a transcript with speech-to-text + minor corrections,—that's definitely on the roadmap.Replies from: DanielFilan, rudi-c
Re audio: cost of recording is probably like one hour (x2 if you have one guest). I think that if I were to write down the whole transcript without talking it would take me easily 4-10x the time it takes me to say it. I'm not sure on how worse the quality is though, but the way I see it conversation is essentially collaborative writing where you get immediate feedback about your flaws in reasoning. And even if I agree that a 1h podcast could be summarized in a few paragraphs, the use case is different (eg. people cooking, running, etc.) so it needs to be somewhat redundant because people are not paying attention.
Re not being interested in forecasting timelines: my current goal is to have people with different expertise share their insights on their particular field and how that could nuance our global understanding of technological progress. For instance, I had a 3h discussion with someone who did robotics competitions, and one planned with a neuroscientist student converted into a ML engineer. I'm not that interested in "forecasting timelines" as a end goal, but more interested in how to dig why people have those inside views about the future (assuming they unconsciously updated on things), so we can either destroy wrong initial reasons for believing something, or gain insight on the actual evidence behind those beliefs.
Anyway, I understand that there's a space about rigorous AI Alignment research discussions, which is currently being covered by AXRP, and the 80k podcasts also cover a lot of it, but it seems relatively low-cost to just record those conversations I would have anyway during conferences so people can decide by themselves what are the correct or bad arguments.
↑ comment by DanielFilan ·
2021-05-04T23:00:50.281Z · LW(p) · GW(p)
I haven't really estimated how long it would take to have a transcript with speech-to-text + minor corrections,—that's definitely on the roadmap.
FWIW: you can pay $1.25 per recorded minute to get rev.com to produce a somewhat inaccurate transcript in 2 days. It then takes me about 2x the length of the recorded audio to fix errors in that transcription. It's kind of a pain in the ass, but worth it if a big chunk of your audience doesn't listen to audio.
[EDIT: changed the thing I was responding to]
Replies from: DanielFilan, Kaj_Sotala
↑ comment by DanielFilan ·
2021-05-05T04:34:58.425Z · LW(p) · GW(p)
Note that the amount of manual fixing depends on the accent of the speaker. The 2x estimate comes from me interviewing someone with a foreign accent, I think for native speakers with standard accents it gets closer to 1x.
Replies from: mtrazzi
comment by devnull ·
2021-05-05T13:30:54.931Z · LW(p) · GW(p)
RSS feed for your podcast pls. I spent 10 minutes on spotify and google podcasts trying to find the RSS feed -- pretty sure it exists, why is this obfuscated?Replies from: mtrazzi
comment by Rudi C (rudi-c) ·
2021-05-05T07:29:29.675Z · LW(p) · GW(p)
Spotify is centralizing podcasting, and plans to implement the same monopolistic, privacy-invasive ad policies Google/Facebook are adhering to. It is worth considering whether allowing them to do this is a net harm for the consumers.