[HN Gopher] Show HN: Research AI - AI Writing Assistant
___________________________________________________________________
Show HN: Research AI - AI Writing Assistant
Author : Mavlonbek1
Score : 18 points
Date : 2021-10-03 18:56 UTC (4 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (researchai.co)
(TXT) w3m dump (researchai.co)
| Y_Y wrote:
| Didn't see any examples or interactive demo of the main product.
| The did have something to generate cover letters though.
|
| > This is Johnson Smith, writing to ask to work as a seasonal
| employee for Enron. I am currently available, and I think I would
| be a good fit for your position. You said you were looking for
| somebody with "strong Linux Unix skills," so I am qualified. I am
| mainly self-taught, not having taken any college classes, but I
| am an avid learner, and I am comfortable using free resources to
| teach myself the skills I need to reach my goals. I worked as a
| software engineer at IBM for 8 years, primarily on laser sharks."
| I am sure you will find that I am not just trying to fulfill a
| need, but that I am qualified for this position.
|
| I'm not particularly impressed by the output.
| sva_ wrote:
| Did you see the video? https://researchai.co/#how-it-works
| Y_Y wrote:
| No, I'm sure it's informative, but I don't normally watch
| videos as a way of evaluating products like this because
| they're rarely a good use of time, and I don't trust them to
| give an accurate portrayal. I much prefer to play with a
| demo.
| deepspace wrote:
| The video comes across as boring and amateurish. Far too many
| pauses and "uhms and aahs". The heavy accent of the narrator
| is also distracting. I would expect a video showcasing a
| professional language tool to be way more polished and
| narrated by someone speaking perfect English.
| moffkalast wrote:
| Well it's widely known that Dr. Evil outsourced his sharks with
| laser beams to IBM, that makes sense to me.
| scott-smith_us wrote:
| Maybe it's just me, but...
|
| When you're writing anything non-trivial, you ought to have
| something new and/or interesting to say, otherwise you're just
| adding noise to the environment.
|
| I can see this being useful in finding ways to rephrase things,
| improving the structure or flow of a document. But this seems to
| be suggesting _content_ rather than form or format. Adding
| content to your writing because it commonly appears in writing
| similar to yours seems to go against the idea of new and
| interesting.
|
| That may be good for politicians, but I can see this being
| misused to 'bulk-up' a small number of ideas or facts into a full
| paper. On balance, this could easily do far more harm than good.
| sva_ wrote:
| It will get harder and harder to find actual quality content
| online, I guess. One might think that perhaps at some point there
| would be the other side of this - an AI reading assistant that
| filters through tons of filler texts like the ones generated by
| this app. It'd have to be very personalized though, because else
| the content creation algorithms would just be trained on them...
|
| Or perhaps the inflation of filler text content will make people
| only refer to their trusted sources - well established publishing
| authorities.
| deepspace wrote:
| I think scam product review sites already make heavy use of
| content generators like this. It is so frustrating to click on
| a "review page" for a product and, after a couple of
| paragraphs, realize that what you are reading is just
| grammatically correct word salad, with no real meaning.
| tasogare wrote:
| Very nice tool for producing blog spam content. No proof or
| explanation is given on why it could work for any meaningful
| writing task (let's say research since that the name of the tool)
| whatsoever.
| threatofrain wrote:
| Anyway you might unveil a taste of your product's capabilities
| without a credit card? Also, if successful, I wonder what this is
| going to do to high school English classes.
| csw-001 wrote:
| For the purposes of actual "research" pin citation is critical -
| you can't just take somebody else's ideas or words without
| attribution. If the AI is pulling in ideas and text from other
| places that needs to be traceable. Does this provide citation
| management for where the original content is coming from?
| chriotte wrote:
| Looks very impressive from your video! What is running it behind
| the scenes? GPT-3? ParlAI?
|
| This is a service I would love to use, but I'd like to have a
| free taster before committing my payment details. I know you do a
| 7-day trial, but at least, for me, there is a big barrier to
| commit my card details to a random service. Maybe worth taking
| inspiration from Grammarly by offering a limited free service to
| get people hooked? Or even letting people sign up for the 7 day
| trial before giving a way payment details?
| wunderflix wrote:
| I was dumb enough to sign up... The results are not impressive at
| all.
|
| Now they have my CC number. There is no way to cancel your
| account. There is just a gmail support email... Let's see if I
| get my $14.99 back.
| omarhaneef wrote:
| I was tempted to check it out so thanks for trying it out.
|
| Is it basically just GPT3?
| IshKebab wrote:
| > Research AI generates original text based on your input, so you
| can be assured about originality.
|
| Somehow I am not assured.
| minimaxir wrote:
| > Research AI generates original text based on your input, so you
| can be assured about originality.
|
| This is impossible to guarantee with current language-generating
| model technology, and will likely make IP lawyers salivate and
| review boards cringe. (case in point, the recent GitHub Copilot
| outputing-unique-code-verbatim snafus)
|
| Not even OpenAI guarantees that generated output from GPT-3 is
| original, just that _they_ won 't enforce copyright.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2021-10-03 23:00 UTC)