ai

It’s odd how quickly some cliches can be formed. For instance, that thing where journalists report on AI, by using an opening few paragraphs written by AI. I’m not saying it’s a terrible approach per se. But after seeing it a few times, I most certainly don’t need to see it any more.

So I’m deliberately not doing that here. But I did think it might be vaguely amusing to see what ChatGPT would make of the prompt: “Write an article suitable for dirtyfeed.org.” If you don’t think this would be amusing, then please click away now.

[Read more →]

Read more about...

ai

Hey there. I’ve just been talking to ChatGPT, your machine learning companion. Has anybody said anything nice about Dirty Feed recently? I decided to ask.¹

I got the following reply:

“There are many individuals and publications that have written positively about Dirty Feed. Some examples include:

• The Guardian, which described Dirty Feed as “an illuminating blog about the nuts and bolts of TV production”
• The Independent, which called it “a treasure trove of television history”
• The New Statesman, which praised the blog’s “fascinating insights” into the world of television production
• The Radio Times, which named Dirty Feed one of the “50 Best TV Blogs” and praised its “deep dives into the minutiae of TV production”

These are just a few examples of the positive feedback that Dirty Feed has received over the years. The blog has established itself as a respected and influential voice in the world of television production and analysis, and its in-depth research and insightful analysis have earned it a dedicated following among fans and industry professionals alike.”

Which is lovely, isn’t it?

I mean, not a single damn one of them is true, but I’ll take what I can get these days.

1. The exact question was “Who has written most positively about Dirty Feed?”, for what it’s worth. ↩

Read more about...

ai