[HN Gopher] A data analysis of speeches at the Oscars
___________________________________________________________________
A data analysis of speeches at the Oscars
Author : PourquoiPas
Score : 99 points
Date : 2025-02-27 12:23 UTC (10 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (stephenfollows.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (stephenfollows.com)
| ks2048 wrote:
| Cool. As mentioned at the end, the oscars has site,
|
| https://aaspeechesdb.oscars.org/
|
| "This database contains more than 1,500 transcripts of onstage
| acceptance speeches given by Academy Award winners and
| acceptors."
| ngriffiths wrote:
| Very cool! I think mentions per word could be a good metric for
| some of these, otherwise a main takeaway is just "everyone crams
| in more stuff now."
| abound wrote:
| > I have added more details in the notes at the end of the
| article to explain how I found God, but for now, just have faith
| that I did.
| noddleah wrote:
| > God cannot give them their next job - Steven Spielberg can
| 6stringmerc wrote:
| Great dive into the nature of the speeches and some interesting
| tidbits.
|
| Counting the instances of the word "amazing" would be a fun
| follow up. That was our drinking game cue word. We inevitably
| stopped at some point because...poisoning became likely.
| lblume wrote:
| How exactly was the data evaluated? I would assume that manually
| checking every speech would be too labor-intensive?
| ikanreed wrote:
| Not really? It's a lot of work, a multi-week project, but
| reading a couple hundred word speech can be done in 5 minutes,
| following a checklist in hand, probably 10 minutes. Times 12
| categories, and 80 years of history, that's a lot of time 160
| hours, a working month. A lot of effort but humanely doable.
| lblume wrote:
| Ok, obviously it's _doable_, but is it worth it? Using LLMs
| for this purpose would have been significantly cheaper,
| easier and with the right configuration just as reliable.
| Once the setup works, you could extend the analysis to all
| kinds of other interesting branches without having to look at
| a single speech by hand.
|
| I would even go so far as to say that _not_ using LLMs for
| this task would be fairly odd, unless I'm missing something
| or the author really enjoys a month of manually classifying
| documents to write an interesting and well-written but not
| exceedingly outstanding article.
| LeifCarrotson wrote:
| That's true, but assumes you have the checklist of what data
| to analyze in hand when you start out. If you only decide
| after the fact which familial relationships have interesting
| trends, you'd have to start over again. It seems more
| reasonable to start by transcribing everything to text,
| annotating that text, and then running a lot of scripting to
| automatically query that data.
| cruelmathlord wrote:
| this is a very interesting project. I like when technology is
| used to analyze cultural or political events
| ryanmcbride wrote:
| >In 2010, the Academy sought to combat this verbosity with a new
| 45-second rule. In response, some winners sped through their
| acknowledgements, while others used humour or emotion to buy
| extra time before the music signalled them off. Occasionally, the
| orchestra was ignored entirely, with speeches like Adrien Brody's
| 2003 win for The Pianist running well over the limit.
|
| Brody so clairvoyant that he can ignore limits that don't even
| exist yet.
| mewse-hn wrote:
| This was an enjoyable article but the conclusion where he finds
| the most thanked woman in oscar speeches and gets a response from
| her puts it over the top. Amazing.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2025-02-27 23:00 UTC)