As the showrunner grows his darkly comic satire into a franchise — and spoofs a certain trial and presidential election in the new season — he says he’s fine losing the viewers who just figured out his social agenda: “Go watch something else.”
As the showrunner grows his darkly comic satire into a franchise — and spoofs a certain trial and presidential election in the new season — he says he’s fine losing the viewers who just figured out his social agenda: “Go watch something else.”
This is the best summary I could come up with:
But it was a cheap, genre show on an unsexy network, The CW, so even an ensuing string of doubles (Revolution, Timeless) did little to move his needle.
But Kripke crafted a scathing satire of 21st century America where Homelander, the chiseled superhero in the American flag cape, is an authoritarian proxy for Donald Trump.
Critics immediately took a shine, but its commercial success — the most recent season earned more eyeballs than The Rings of Power, with 106 billion minutes viewed in 2022 — made Kripke a priority at the streamer.
Suddenly, we were telling a story about the intersection of celebrity and authoritarianism and how social media and entertainment are used to sell fascism.
It’s happened now almost every season, and we write them sometimes close to two years before they air and again we’ll find that the news is accurately reflecting whatever we’re talking about.
But, especially for young showrunners, I do wish there was still that Syfy channel and CW model of learning how to stretch your dollar, both in terms of writing and producing.
The original article contains 2,169 words, the summary contains 179 words. Saved 92%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!
Sometimes just cutting out paragraphs to “summarize” the text is just plain bad. This is one of those times, and time for me to finally block this thing.
But but suddenly critics it’s but. I’m not defending the bot this is just the first words of each paragraph and it’s really annoying to read.
You realise you are reacting with feelings to a bot? I read the whole article and it’s just an interview format which makes no sense to summarise. I mean you can always disregard, but it does save some time most of the time, helping you quickly judge if the content is worth a full read or not without opening the link. It’s a technology
I am very aware of that it is a bot 😄. And I have to say: a rather bad-its-job one, not just in this case.
Whenever I read one of its “summaries” it was blatantly obvious that it just cuts parts, often times mauling paragraphs and destroying contexts. And that does not offer any value to me, hence I permanently disregard it now by putting that account on a block list (next to other not-so-great bot accounts).
that’s actually what the underlying method does, as this is extractive summary, hence it mostly cuts and stitches things.
From my naive understanding, this type of method does not use or “understand” context.
The alternative is abstractive summary, which is where LLMs (or even small/medium language models) are good for. But I suspect that would be a controversial choice on lemmy.
I think that this is the logical place to put those opinions - it would make less sense unlinked to the post.
I dislike that it’s been shotgunned at nearly every post I see, regardless of how relevant it might be, and I don’t trust the output to represent the link.
Given there’s no “bad bot” style feedback functionality (that I know of), what else is there to do than block it?
Github feedback? The bot’s code didn’t write itself. I doubt the programmer(s) read all the posts that the bot generates
deleted by creator