[HN Gopher] Show HN: YouTube Summaries Using GPT
___________________________________________________________________
Show HN: YouTube Summaries Using GPT
Hi, I'm Alex. I created Eightify to take my mind off things during
a weekend, but I was surprised that my friends were genuinely
interested in it. I kept going, and now it's been nine weeks since
I started. I got the idea to summarize videos when my friend sent
me a lengthy video again. This happens to me often; the video title
is so enticing, and then it turns out to be nothing. I had been
working with GPT for 6 months by the time, so everything looked
like a nail to me. It's a Chrome extension, and I'm offering 5
free tries for videos under an hour. After that, you have to buy a
package. I'm not making money yet, but it pays for GPT, which can
be pricey for long texts. And some of Lex Fridman's podcasts are
incredibly long. I'm one of those overly optimistic people when it
comes to GPT. So many people tell me, "Oh, it doesn't solve this
problem yet; let's wait for GPT-4". The real issue is that their
prompts are usually inadequate, and it takes you anywhere from two
days to two weeks to make it work. Testing and debugging,
preferably with automated tests. I believe you can solve many
problems with GPT-3 already. I would love to answer any questions
you have about the product and GPT in general. I've invested at
least 500 hours into prompt engineering. And I enjoy watching other
people's prompts too!
Author : ax8080
Score : 116 points
Date : 2023-01-27 16:45 UTC (6 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.eightify.app)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.eightify.app)
| mistercool wrote:
| It would be really great if there was a URL generated with the
| results of the summary. Then I could save it to Pocket / Reader
| and it would pass through their integrations to Obsidian.
| ax8080 wrote:
| I will definitely do that!
| ggregoire wrote:
| TIL: was gonna ask how do you get the transcript but YouTube
| actually provides it, it's hidden in the "..." menu next to
| "Clip".
| ax8080 wrote:
| I use this this library to do that:
| https://pypi.org/project/youtube-transcript-api/
| nebula8804 wrote:
| This app shows how dangerous it is to trust ChatGPT for anything
| even somewhat important.
|
| I just threw in a simple example news video and while it did
| summarize the video somewhat accurately(it got senator Joe
| Manchin's name wrong), it missed complete segments! (the "Goodbye
| Toyota e-TNGA" segment)
|
| [1]:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UM4n1Isfr6E
|
| [2]: https://i.imgur.com/RyFStVm.png
| ax8080 wrote:
| Yes, it's still far from perfect, sorry about that. And it's
| not about the GPT. I'm sure I can greatly increase the quality
| on my side.
| nebula8804 wrote:
| Your app is slick and works great. How can you increase the
| quality? I thought you just pass the subtitles to chatgpt and
| return the results?
| ax8080 wrote:
| It's not that straightforward. I would say that the most
| important part of pre-processing is how to break the
| transcript into parts.
|
| But there are many more things to improve. It's a pipeline:
| you can add more models, you can train them, you can change
| prompts, you can post-process the results. But it takes
| time. More time each step.
| nebula8804 wrote:
| Ah ok then maybe I was too harsh. Your app is pretty
| cool. Great job!
| ax8080 wrote:
| Oh, it's okay! In the end, what matters is how much value
| it gives the user, not how complicated it is inside!
| thank you!
| odysseus wrote:
| Cool project and great presentation, but do you have any plans
| for a Safari extension?
|
| Apple has supported Chrome extension porting for at least 1 year
| now, and a conversion tool is built into Xcode:
| https://developer.apple.com/documentation/safariservices/saf...
|
| ------------
|
| For videos less than 1 hour in length, I prefer
| https://youtubetranscript.com , then scroll to about 1/2 - 3/4
| way through the transcript where youtubers generally hide their
| nuggets of info.
|
| Eightify does seem better suited for long Lex Fridman/etc. type
| content though.
| ax8080 wrote:
| Thank you! Yep. Safari and Edge are on my list. It should be
| easy enough to port there.
| Existenceblinks wrote:
| I wonder why there's no app capitalize YT comments (don't know if
| there's api for that or not). Finalized decision often come from
| reading comments .. it's sort of review+debate on both sides and
| a little bit more authentic.
| ax8080 wrote:
| I'm really thinking about doing summaries for comments as well.
|
| It's a more interesting task when there are two sides. Even
| now, my app doesn't work well for debates. It tries to bring
| the points of view together. I want to work on separation.
| dsalzman wrote:
| Really cool Alex! I think it would also be interesting to pull
| and use the most rewatched data[1] from each video too as an
| additional weight. That is how I usually skip to the "important"
| parts without a summary.
|
| [1] https://stackoverflow.com/questions/72610552/most-
| replayed-d...
| ax8080 wrote:
| Thank you! Yes, I'll definitely do that. That's on the list!
| nunez wrote:
| This is amazing.
|
| I thought of something much more primitive recently: a Reddit bot
| that transcribes videos behind YouTube links (since I hate
| watching videos but do like reading).
|
| I won't use this right now (since I don't do Chrome) but will
| gladly pay for this service when I can throw a YouTube link at it
| and get back a wall of text (assuming costs are reasonable).
| ax8080 wrote:
| Thank you! It is very easy for me to make such a service, but
| then I would lose a lot of users who would install the
| extension otherwise.
|
| By the way, what browser do you use?
| jcq3 wrote:
| Hello Alex, I've built a similar app for my own usage, I don't
| plan to ship it online. How do you handle token limitation for
| summarizing lengthy videos?
| ax8080 wrote:
| I do many requests. Then I summarize the summaries. This
| approach is well described in this OpenAI article:
| https://openai.com/blog/summarizing-books/
| jcq3 wrote:
| Useful link thanks. This approach is not cost effective
| though, I guess you're working on solution to optimize your
| cost. Fine tuning? Embedding?
| ax8080 wrote:
| Honestly, I haven't worked on cost reduction yet. I have a
| backlog, but I haven't done anything from there.
|
| One idea is to use other models to shorten text by throwing
| out meaningless words. I estimate this will reduce the
| length of the text (and thus the GPT cost) by 30%.
| newswasboring wrote:
| > One idea is to use other models to shorten text by
| throwing out meaningless words.
|
| Does this mean GPT does not need coherent sentences to
| understand?
| ax8080 wrote:
| My feeling is that she understands much better than
| people do. If you understand a sentence from which some
| of the conjunction words have been taken out, she will
| understand 100%. And I think this will all be smoothed
| out on a transcript of 150,000 characters (that's the
| average size of a podcast).
| eob wrote:
| Hey jcq3
|
| Anything in particular thing stopping you from shipping it
| online? Or just that it's not necessary for your use?
|
| (Context: I've been working on `Heroku for LLM apps` and trying
| to understand where the value/frictions are)
| nacs wrote:
| Firefox version planned?
|
| Also, please, less Elon on the front page. It's a little
| nauseating.
| ax8080 wrote:
| Nope, Firefox is not planned :( Maybe after Safari, Edge and
| mobile. Sorry about that.
|
| Yes, I'll probably remove Elon :) Fun fact: twitter banned my
| ads account, when I tried to create ads with this video.
| nikunjk wrote:
| This is great! Can you use the same tech to do for
| podcasts/audio?
| ax8080 wrote:
| Sure I can. Some podcasts are already posted on youtube. If I
| see a demand for it, I'll do it, of course.
| r0fl wrote:
| Amazing product. Something I will gladly be paying for!
|
| You mention that you have invested 500 hours into prompt
| engineering. Are there any specific resources you would suggest
| to get maximum value out of GPT? Any videos, websites, podcasts,
| ebooks, books, anything that really stands out?
|
| I have been playing with it for a while now and am getting good
| at having it spit out what I'm looking for but usually it takes
| an extra 3-4 prompts to rearrange the responses that I want.
|
| Thanks and again, great execution on a cool idea!
| ax8080 wrote:
| When I first got to know it, there wasn't much good resources.
| And now there are 100 times more articles, but I haven't
| watched them. So I can't recommend anything yet.
|
| Oh yes, I remembered that I saw this - it's good advice:
| https://help.openai.com/en/articles/6654000-best-practices-f...
| swyx wrote:
| there's https://learnprompting.org/
|
| i've also been keeping a popular series of notes
| https://github.com/sw-yx/ai-notes/blob/main/TEXT_PROMPTS.md
| WrtCdEvrydy wrote:
| Target Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gdl1GKIbaWo
|
| Video has less than 30K views Free plan is limited to videos less
| than 1 hour long and with more than 30k views
|
| This is a very lame limitation in regards to views. Honestly
| trying to see if my videos were delivering enough value to
| justify the title.
| ax8080 wrote:
| Yes, the other guys above have already responded that this way
| I want to increase the likelihood of repetition. If you do the
| summary for free, at least there's a chance someone else will
| need it.
|
| It's a hypothesis and on my current traffic I can't say it's
| worked. Maybe I'll change the limits when I have more data.
| ryanwaggoner wrote:
| It makes sense though, because you might be the only one
| interested in a summary of those long-tail videos, whereas the
| cost of the summary of more popular videos can be amortized
| across many users.
| freedomben wrote:
| I'm guessing OP is caching results so only has to process each
| video once (which I would do as well). The limitation makes
| more sense when you consider % of cache hits with the
| limitation will be much higher, which means lower cost for
| running the free tier.
| _the_special_ wrote:
| Can you state the price of the "packages" in the landing page?
|
| Also, does it always give me 8 bullet points from each video? It
| would make sense for videos that have chapters to give summaries
| to each chapter instead.
| ax8080 wrote:
| Yeah, sorry. I'm changing prices every 2 days here, and I want
| to try subscriptions instead of packages as well. I'll put
| prices on the site in 1-2 weeks!
|
| Currently the prices are: $8.6 for 20 summaries ($0.43 each)
| $19.8 for 60 summaries ($0.33 each) $48.6 for 180 summaries
| ($0.27 each)
|
| > Also, does it always give me 8 bullet points from each video?
| It would make sense for videos that have chapters to give
| summaries to each chapter instead.
|
| Yes, it's now a fixed number of 8 parts. I tested different
| numbers, it seemed to me a universally convenient simple
| solution for videos of any length. But yes, I will take
| chapters into account when splitting, right now I ignore that
| information.
|
| At the same time, the product isn't as useful as if when there
| are no chapters at all.
| Destiner wrote:
| This is a neat project, but it also makes me wonder how much
| useful information is actually provided by an average YouTube
| video.
|
| Taking the headphone review on the landing page as an example,
| the generated summary is "The Sony XM5s offer improved audio and
| call quality, but may not be worth the extra cost compared to the
| XM4s."
|
| Like, duh? You probably could deduce that even without watching
| the video, 14 mins of your life saved.
| ASalazarMX wrote:
| Most YouTube influencer guides recommend at least 10 minute
| videos, and by god you will watch 10 minutes of someone
| describing information that could be read on a short table
| while they add sound effects, animations, jokes, and pogfaces.
|
| When people tell me they don't watch TV, I ask them if the
| watch YouTube or Twitch, because these kind of services are
| what TV was before: something with low density of information,
| better used as distraction while you do something else.
|
| Nevertheless, I'm uncomfortable with playing a video in the
| background, because that might give the platforms the
| impression that wasting my time is fine if it improves metrics.
|
| These days, our attention is constantly being pulled in several
| directions at once, so I praise projects like this one, who try
| to wrestle control back.
| texasbigdata wrote:
| I believe this maybe might be due to YouTube being able to
| interject 2 advertisements on videos surpassing ~7 minutes in
| length and "engagement" (not clicking out) being a potential
| metric related to monetization.
|
| If you can get the headline click with 30 seconds worth of
| insight, then your payday is related to padding to get to the
| appropriate length. Imho
| whatshisface wrote:
| The answer is very little and that's why the OP wanted
| something to summarize it.
| ZeroGravitas wrote:
| On a similar angle, does anyone use this tech to automate
| "saved you a click" answers to clickbait headlines?
|
| i.e. "You won't believe which beloved celebrity just died" and
| it just tells you the vital info.
| legohead wrote:
| I see that as a good feature. Some of these review videos are
| just a guy going over the product's own marketing spiel and you
| don't notice until halfway through the video.
|
| If the summary spits out a bunch of useless info, you can find
| a better one.
| ax8080 wrote:
| I think it's perfect for videos where you need an answer.
| Product reviews to choose from are the most extreme case - what
| headphones should I buy? Many of the videos, though, we watch
| for fun and, enjoying the picture and the voice. I use is
| myself daily and have realized that I don't watch all videos
| for information and answers.
|
| For me it's 30% for information, 70% for fun.
| seydor wrote:
| Now i need an AI to make a video of the summary
| ax8080 wrote:
| It's an interesting idea, but here it's a more pressing issue
| of copyright infringement.
| renewiltord wrote:
| The way it works is you get the transcript that Google provides
| and you ship that to GPT-3 and ask it to summarize? Cool tool.
| ax8080 wrote:
| Yep. That's how it works in general. Thank you!
| s0rr0wskill wrote:
| How do I sign in with google to use it?
| ax8080 wrote:
| After installing the extension, go to youtube. There is a "Sign
| in with Google" button where "related videos" are usually
| located. If something went wrong, please send a screenshot to
| me at support@eightify.app
| s0rr0wskill wrote:
| I see it now, had to turn off adblock
| raybb wrote:
| If someone else has already summarized the video will I be able
| to see the summary for free?
| ax8080 wrote:
| No, sorry. If I do that, I have to make the plans even more
| expensive. And users will randomly get free summaries, which
| will confuse them. "Why should I pay if sometimes I get them
| for free for no reason?"
| raybb wrote:
| Perhaps you might let the transcripts of the example videos
| on your website be accessed for free without signing in to
| see what it works like.
| dexterdog wrote:
| I get the point of charging since the compute resources cost you
| money, but how are the video rights holders not able to make a
| claim against any profits?
| ax8080 wrote:
| I'll contemplate this issue later. I deem this risk to be lower
| than not discovering a reliable acquisition channel or not
| being able to attain high margins.
|
| Instinctively it appears as though I'm creating _original
| content_. However, all this legal stuff is often
| counterintuitive.
| paulclark wrote:
| Awesome stuff! What were your biggest learnings from iterations
| on prompt engineering?
| ax8080 wrote:
| Someday, I will make a separate post about it. Although today
| there seem to be hundreds of people selling "how to work with
| GPT".
|
| This is what comes to mind immediately: 1. Don't solve more
| than 1 problem with 1 Prompt. Decompose it into different tasks
| and make a separate prompt for each one. 2. Use instructions at
| the beginning. Very short and unambiguous. You have to
| understand _exactly_ what you want and mean. "Answer me as a
| philosopher" is an example of an unspecific instruction. 3. If
| the instructions don't work, show the concept providing an
| example. Examples are more expensive than instructions because
| they take up more tokens. 4. The best way to debug propts is
| when you have a dataset and autotests. I used GPT to evaluate
| the results. 5. Temperature 0 is fine 99% of the time. (btw I
| was surprised to find that it does not guarantee a
| deterministic result; the OpenAI support confirmed that)
| sarchertech wrote:
| I understand language changes, but learnings as a noun just
| drives me up the wall. Management jargon making its way into
| everyday speech is too much for me.
|
| Just use lessons, or "what did you learn?"
|
| This isn't directed at you personally.
| qup wrote:
| Hey if you want a lesson, I'll learn you at least one more
| way you can use the word.
| adv0r wrote:
| take a look at this chrome extension -->
| https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/youtube-summary-wi...
| ax8080 wrote:
| Yeah, I've seen it, sure. Thank you. When it went into public
| release, it made me nervous and in a hurry to finish mine.
|
| The author uses ChatGPT and that limits it a bit. Because it
| took me 80% of my time and effort to code the preprocessing of
| the transcript before sending it to GPT. (I mean if you just
| put transcript to GPT and ask to summarize it sucks)
|
| But his product is free, that's cool. Because he uses ChatGPT
| on the client. And I have to pay for GPT.
| ntonozzi wrote:
| Have you compared GPT with prompting to other models like
| https://huggingface.co/sshleifer/distilbart-cnn-12-6? Do you know
| what the state of the art is in summarization technology?
| ax8080 wrote:
| I have tried many (all the popular) huggingface summarization
| models, they don't compare to GPT. Basically, they highlight
| the parts they think are important. But they can't "understand"
| and generalize.
|
| Frankly, I haven't read the papers about summarization. But I
| will have to when I'll work on reducing costs.
| ntonozzi wrote:
| I see, thank you for the insight. The OpenAI paper about
| summarization is an easy read and very similar to your
| approach, if you are looking for somewhere to start:
| https://openai.com/blog/summarizing-books/.
| jpeter wrote:
| This is the death of all tutorial video that strech 1 minute of
| information to a 20 minute video
| ax8080 wrote:
| You know, I'm generally a fan of being brief. So many people
| use GPT to create _more_ content. I am on the opposite side and
| I will _reduce_ content.
| Geee wrote:
| Reducing content is more valuable for humans. Unfortunately
| all platforms incentivize the opposite.
| dexterdog wrote:
| Which is why sponsorblock is a thing
| bobwernstein1 wrote:
| I want to search youtube transcripts. Is that possible? Like
| google search but instead of articles it searching in the
| transcripts of all youtube videos
| ax8080 wrote:
| That would require parsing all of YouTube. I thought I heard
| that YouTube already did that, but I can't seem to find it now.
| timetraveller26 wrote:
| I think is funny that in the near future people are going to use
| ChatGPT to pad their content and then consumers are going to use
| it reversely to get a summary.
| peter_d_sherman wrote:
| >I think is funny that in the near future people are going to
| use ChatGPT to pad their content and then consumers are going
| to use it reversely to get a summary.
|
| Brilliant observation! It's sort of like if you took the most
| extreme lossy data expansion algorithm -- and then fed the
| output of that through the most extreme lossy data compression
| algorithm...
|
| User: "Computer, turn binary 1 -- into _everything in the
| Universe_... "
|
| Computer: "OK, here it is..." (spits out a result which is
| [exa|zetta|yotta|ronna|quetta|???]bytes long...)
|
| User: "Computer, now turn everything in the Universe back into
| 1..."
|
| Computer: "Processing... this may take some _time_... please
| wait... " (puts up progress bar that increments so slowly that
| it appears not to move...)
|
| <g>
|
| Related quote by Douglas Adams:
|
| _" There is a theory which states that if ever anyone
| discovers exactly what the Universe is for and why it is here,
| it will instantly disappear and be replaced by something even
| more bizarre and inexplicable. There is another theory which
| states that this has already happened."_
|
| - Douglas Adams, The Restaurant at the End of the Universe
|
| Anyway, I could definitely see content creators padding with AI
| -- and consumers summarizing the content with it...
| ax8080 wrote:
| At some point people won't be needed in this crazy cycle.
| yamtaddle wrote:
| How much energy will the chain of AIs and counter-AIs between
| content production and content consumption/discovery burn?
| More or less than Bitcoin does? Because we complain about
| that, but this crap would be even less beneficial than
| Bitcoin is. But how can one opt out of this game? If you do
| it unilaterally, it just means you lose. Government
| regulation, the usual solution to this kind of coordination
| problem? What would that even look like?
| RobotToaster wrote:
| >Government regulation, the usual solution to this kind of
| coordination problem? What would that even look like?
|
| Maybe we should get an AI to write it.
| pixl97 wrote:
| > Government regulation, the usual solution to this kind of
| coordination problem? What would that even look like?
|
| Which government is the question you should be asking.
|
| For example, lets say I'm a authoritarian government that
| is hostile to other nations. In general there is a strong
| imperative to block GPT use in my own country except by
| approved users to make propaganda. At the same time it is a
| very useful weapon for me to use against my enemies. I can
| use the 'bullshit asymmetry theory' against them and drown
| their population in conflicting propaganda.
|
| But you see unlike nuclear weapons, we really don't need
| multibillion dollar facilities to make these things.
| Midsized companies make these things easy enough. There is
| no opting out, unless of course you want a world wide
| police state to ensure that you're not making anything
| naughty with your computer. And of course you should
| realize your government, along with everyone else's
| government is making their own naughty versions of this
| kind of application anyway.
|
| So, yea, some smaller EU countries won't make one because
| of the law, but the US, China, and likely Russia would do
| it anyway because screw you, we have nukes behavior that
| drives their other actions.
| mcbuilder wrote:
| Someone has to pay to run the AI though. With Bitcoin it's
| a bit different, you mine and you get money directly. Even
| if you have a AI burning GPU cycles all day generating
| content, you still gotta turn it into cash.
| pixl97 wrote:
| In the US presidential election billions of dollars are
| spent each cycle. If you think advertisements are the
| only use for AI you're underestimating the scope of the
| problem.
| yamtaddle wrote:
| The motivation to pay is to generate better spam on the
| one side, and to spot that spam on the other. Plausibly,
| a lot of content will go through multiple iterations of
| both of those before reaching any actual human. Same game
| that's going on now, just cheaper (even more automated)
| and at higher volume.
| kaibee wrote:
| > How much energy will the chain of AIs and counter-AIs
| between content production and content
| consumption/discovery burn?
|
| While I have plenty of cynicism about this and also expect
| it to at least partially play out like this, let me offer a
| more optimistic perspective on the same thing.
|
| People come into media with different amounts of background
| knowledge and context. Currently, this is basically solved
| by a tiered system of 'knowledge' distribution. As an
| example (though I think something similar exists outside of
| the sciences too), scientists write papers that are read by
| science communicators who put out press releases which are
| read by journalists who write articles about stuff all of
| which is read by various content creators who remix all of
| this into their own content tailored to their specific
| following. Part of this is tailoring is knowing what
| context/knowledge your audience already has and giving them
| enough new information for the new content to be digestible
| without the consumer needing to seek out other sources. So
| when ChatGPT-N is reencoding the content for you, it can
| personalize it your level of knowledge, without wasting
| your time by either rehashing stuff you're already aware of
| or by including context that you wouldn't necessarily have
| known that you're missing.
|
| This of course means that ChatGPT will need to know what
| you do/don't know...
| _Algernon_ wrote:
| >But how can one opt out of this game?
|
| Move to alternative webs such as Gopher or Gemini, which
| make it impractical / impossible to monetize based on
| clicks / engagement / amount of content. The issue isn't
| that you can generate spam. The issue is that you can make
| money by doing so.
| throw10920 wrote:
| Gemini is an anti-intellectual artistic project that
| forbids interactivity and rich media like inline images,
| which massively increase learning and comprehension. If
| you're looking to learn, you'd want to _avoid_ Gemini
| (and Gopher, which has similar restrictions).
| _Algernon_ wrote:
| Gemini has interactivity, it just needs to be server
| side. Of course it is limited but _that is the point_. I
| 'll take "anti-intellectual artistic project" over
| "cesspool of lowest common denominator" any day.
| pixl97 wrote:
| This saves you from nothing.
|
| While making money is a big game, it's not the only game.
| Your thoughts and actions leads to behaviors off your
| computer. This is why we see all kinds of political spam
| and propaganda to affect your choice at the ballot box.
| _Algernon_ wrote:
| As long as we assume that the html web doesn't completely
| die and remains significantly larger, it will always
| remain the biggest target for those kind of activities.
| Better to have a potential target of millions, than a
| target of hundreds or thousands.
| pixl97 wrote:
| Depends what you're targeting. For example targeting a
| much smaller self select group of 'computer experts' for
| a watering hole attack of one type or another is a great
| way to get in to some juicy systems.
|
| If a system is machine readable and writable (which AI is
| fastly increasing this definition) you must assume that
| not only can you be attacked, you must assume that you
| are being attacked.
| honkler wrote:
| this is exactly what philosopher Nick Land has said.
| Laminary wrote:
| We just need "Keywords" to help ChatGPT decide what to include
| in summaries. This will lead to keyword stuffing. And
| eventually it comes full-circle with SEO-like word soup so that
| ChatGPT is forced to output recipe blog spam. It's perfect.
| T3RMINATED wrote:
| [dead]
| darau1 wrote:
| Have you built any GPTs yourself?
| ax8080 wrote:
| Oh no. I think it takes a lot of resources to do that.
| Definitely can't be done in a weekend :)
| 7ewis wrote:
| Hey Alex, this is really cool. I've used ChatGPT quite a bit and
| Stable Diffusion in the past but still feel like I've only
| scratched the surface of what's possible. Great to see lots of
| projects popping up using the tech in new innovative ways!
|
| Please could you give an overview of how this actually works?
| Have some ideas of where the tech could be useful but not sure
| how I'd actually go about implementing it. Do you have a GPT
| model on a server and code to transcribe the video then summarise
| the transcription. Or do you use one of the APIs from OpenAI?
|
| If you use their APIs:
|
| * How costly has it been to run your service? (If you don't mind
| answering)
|
| * Is it customisable? If you wanted to run a chat bot for
| example, would you be able to make it understand the request (I'd
| assume something similar to an 'intent' when developing Alexa
| skills) and give it data so it knows the answer?
| [deleted]
| ax8080 wrote:
| Thank you!!
|
| > Please could you give an overview of how this actually works?
|
| 1. I download Youtube subtitles (it doesn't work for videos
| without youtube subtitles yet. my analytics shows that 15% of
| videos don't have subtitles. I tried to use OpenAI Whisper, but
| it takes several minutes to transcribe a video, so I put that
| task off for now)
|
| 2. Then I break the transcript into parts.
|
| 3. Then I summarize each part with GPT - and then I summarize
| the summaries to get chapter names - and then I summarize again
| to get the title.
|
| Yes, I use OpenAI GPT API. I pay them their standard pricing
| for davinci-003 and the cost for 1 video is between $0.1 and
| $0.9 depending on the video length (actually, the transcript
| length). I have a hard limit to prevent abuse.
|
| Yep, it's fully customizable. Yes, you can provide data to it.
| It would take 1 hour of coding to make a prototype of a chat
| bot. And then 500 hours to make it work well.
| yacine_ wrote:
| I built something similar; I've got code links up if you want
| to cargo.
|
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34549402
| ax8080 wrote:
| That's interesting. I really like watching other people's
| prompts. I'll look into it this weekend!
| _Algernon_ wrote:
| It would be nice if you didn't have to log in with your google
| account to use it, or at least that it didn't request excessive
| PII, such as name and profile picture.
|
| There is no reason to request more than email.
| nerdponx wrote:
| But then you can't monetize it as easily.
| ax8080 wrote:
| I hastily connected google auth and seemed to choose the
| minimum of data. I'll see if I can use just email (I definitely
| don't need anything else). I need auth to limit the use,
| otherwise I could wake up bankrupt one day :)
| counttheforks wrote:
| No payment limits?
| ax8080 wrote:
| Well, I set the limit in OpenAI, yes. But if the service
| stops working I will also be very upset.
| yacine_ wrote:
| this is great, keep on hacking!
| ax8080 wrote:
| thanks, that's inspiring
| mistercool wrote:
| I'm ready to sign up for a subscription. Hurry up with that! :)
| ax8080 wrote:
| You can buy the "package" for now :) Subscriptions will be
| ready by Monday or Tuesday!
| jdthedisciple wrote:
| Awesome idea! Timesavers should be moneymakers in this time.
|
| Also, did you get 5000 downloads in a single day?
|
| Or when did you launch it?
| ax8080 wrote:
| I launched it on Product Hunt last week. I've been tweaking and
| fixing bugs since then and have now published it here.
|
| Thank you!
| toddmorey wrote:
| This new level of content understanding & summarizing is huge.
|
| My young son uses YouTube for tutorials to learn programming and
| 3D apps. But I really struggle because he's come across
| objectionable content as well, and the tools YouTube provides for
| moderation or filtering are completely worthless. They don't
| care. I'm only left to think they want our kids to see
| controversial and even radicalizing content because it increases
| engagement metrics.
|
| AI that can prescreen videos?! Regaining some feeling of control
| and confidence about the content that comes into my house?! I AM
| SO IN!
|
| I have no interest in censoring anyone else or limiting access
| for others. I just want to have some agency over what my kids are
| exposed to without removing the actual knowledge share advantages
| that the internet can and does provide.
| ax8080 wrote:
| Interesting application! It hadn't occurred to me. To my shame,
| the best I've come up with is to cut ads from influencers
| videos (make a rewind button).
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2023-01-27 23:02 UTC)