To clarify, the page I referred to was written years ago, so no one is saving time by modifying it. My question was more about replacing descriptions on existing pages than about new ones. That’s arguably a separate question.
3 Likes
I assume to get content consistency across all the lessons.
1 Like
That’s what I was wondering, too. Why re-write? And the Blackbird example is pertinent to me, as it’s a song I’ve been learning, and I really enjoy the comments Justin has written. They ADD to the lesson, rather than ‘summarize for “content consistency”’ … and I won’t get into my thoughts about that concept of homogenizing content!
3 Likes
I think my main concern was that someone might have replaced the existing descriptions because they feel like the new description is better for users. My main point is that it’s not. As others have said, it’s bland and a bit grating, and it makes Justin’s site seem indistinguishable from every other LLM site.
However, if they did it to attract more clicks, and did it knowingly at the expense of quality (as in “We know it’s worse but we’ll get more traffic”), I think that’s more understandable. I don’t personally want that, but I assume they have tested it and confirmed it’s true. In that case, how about (a) showing both, and (b) making clear what was machine-written? Leave the existing description, append the AI description, and make it clear that it’s an AI summary of the video? A lot of the challenge comes from using LLM output in places where people expect and want human thought - and here, when we want Justin’s thought. If the page had Justin’s description, then “AI summary of the video” (without the formulaic LLM preface and “Whether you’re…” closing), perhaps it could serve learners who are here for Justin, and still attract whatever traffic they think the LLM output is receiving.
4 Likes
To standardise the viewer’s experience isn’t a bad reason for doing it using AI, they’re very efficient and effective at doing that type of task - but there is a caveat, in ALL AI Apps/programs etc there is always a statement of the simple fact that AI can be wrong and anything it does for you has to be checked for validity.
Same here. I can understand the opportunity of saving time for other tasks and SEO and congruence among the content, but I am also one who’d prefer Justin’s way to express. (and rather keep content that was already written)
Should there be quirks inside, I’d still prefer them.
I am no english native, but I’m at least good as a content checker if you need someone to read texts and report errors 
Glad if I could be of help with anything regarding the free content - I benefited from it SO much!
5 Likes
I wasn’t going to say anything, but i can’t ignore nature…
I get it, there’s automation that needs to be done. This can be done cheap, if you don’t have the budget you need to get humans to do this.
I truly miss the pre-LLM, pre everything “ai” days of the net.
But again, i understand the need, in this case, to use it.
I’m wondering though, what will happen when, not if, the bubble bursts and companies will be forced to ask a price for using their “services”.
What will happen then?
Oh well, we’ll see i guess…
1 Like
I agree with a lot of that. For me, labelling the AI-summary would not be crucial, but makes it more transparent in the end. I really appreciated the existing lesson descriptions and IMO it would have been a good way in between to add the LLM summaries to the existing lesson texts to generate more traffic. This way, we can have both and the work that was already put in the existing lesson descriptions wouldn’t have been “wasted”.
What I definitely understand is the point that for newly created lessons this way can definitely save lots of time that can be invested elsewhere. In fact, it is admirable how Justin and his team can keep up the pace with everything going on instead of being a relatively small business. With frequently added song lessons, new courses in the making as well as making improvements to pretty much all of the areas of the JG universe it makes sense to reduce some of the efforts where possible.
I am wondering how the lesson descriptions were made before? Are there any notes before the lessons are shot, like kind of a script? If that’s the case, can’t these also be used to add a little more lesson specific content and a little more of Justin’s thoughts while making the video? As Dom said above:
Please add me to the list of volunteers. Even though I’m not a native as well, I earn my living with QA’ing software and the processes involved in the making which includes lots of reading English - I have kind of proof-read-eyes that might be useful. 
I’m also happy to help out with writing anything or whatever would be of use.
5 Likes
This!! Great idea. I’m also happy to volunteer, if I can help!
2 Likes
Yes, we’re starting to talk about things we can do! For a while, this was becoming a discussion about AI, which wasn’t the point. Yes, it’s here, and we’re not going back, but that’s a different thing.
(A digression: I think we’ll know when AI becomes sentient when it balks at “artificial” and insists we call it ‘machine’, ‘electronic’, ‘silicon’, or whatever kind of intelligence it wants to be called!)
Volunteering is great. Perhaps we could donate, those of us that can?
Or just accept what is, and simply appreciate the enormous amount of free content and the friendly community. And learn guitar!
An alternative could be is that Justin’s ‘personal’ lessons go behind a paywall. I’ll take AI if that’s the only other option…
4 Likes
This gets my vote
4 Likes
A post was merged into an existing topic: LLM - moderator created spin-off to house the wider AI comments from the topic about JG’s use of LLM for lesson descriptions
AI is a very interesting topic. I’m just aware that we’ve taken this conversation away from the original focus, regarding the description of old JG videos which have recently been replaced by AI transcripts.
I believe the purpose was to get people’s feedback on that specific issue, so that the moderators can feed back to the website team what we think of this.
I suggest we keep the focus there, and talk about AI in general on dedicated topics (there are many on this forum), as Richard politely asked:
My 2c.
2 Likes
Storm in a teacup in my opinion 
I can’t remember the last time I actually read the ‘blurb’ with the lesson description.
If you have spent any time at all on the site, you will know the style of his lesson, and the video is the point, not the ‘authenticity’ of the content description.
I search for a lesson I want to watch and click play 
1 Like
Thanks for the honest and meaningful feedback everyone, whatever is your point of view on the matter, that’s how we really can support Justin and the Website Team!
I guess (well I’m pretty sure to be honest) Justin has already been debating with himself about the pros and cons of using AI…it would be weird if he, as any business man nowadays, wouldn’t try out the many possibilities the new technologies offer to better shape his work and decide what they like/dislike, what it’s worth and what it’s not.
In the end all I wanted to say is thank you Justin for teaching us, I’m confident you can choose the tools and means that you repute proper and useful to your goals… and also find a good balance between where the world is going and where it’s always been and always will be! 
5 Likes
Holy smokes! How deep down the list of things to care about does this fall? If I did keep a list, this wouldn’t even be on it.
Nothing wrong with generating draft content as long as it’s reviewed by an actual human being.
For example, if you wanted to write about guitar neck profiles, you could ask it to tell you about the existing profiles, cut n’ paste it, and then edit it into your words. Makes the process faster and the end product is essentially the same as what you would want to say if you typed out every letter yourself.