“On the matchmaking app, if we ask you a question and your tonality changes in the response, it cues to us that you may not be telling us the full truth. And so we’ll ask you that same question in two or three different ways throughout your experience,” Cohen-Aslatei says. “We built this to mimic what a matchmaker would do for a client. The LLM is tracking pitch and tone change in your voice because we want to make sure that we have an accurate understanding of who you are and what you’re looking for.”
After answering dozens more questions about lifestyle, future goals, boundaries, family, attraction, hobbies, and more over the course of a few days, Tai told me it’d take the information provided and get back to me. Two days later, I received my first two potential matches.
I Love You, Alive Girl
As a 31-year-old woman, I put my ideal age range at a healthy 26 to 40 years old. My first two matches were 23 and 47. One was not alive when 9/11 happened, and the other had already graduated from college at that time. Off to a rocky start.
When a potential match is found, the person’s picture is blurred, and Tai gives you a synopsis of what makes you a potential good match. (You need to provide selfie verification to confirm identity, and no one unverified will ever be matched.) After that, you can click to see a bit more about them, like profession, age, income, and a short bio that the AI creates.
At this stage of AI adoption, there is still a strong statistical bias toward, let’s say, men who wear wraparound sunglasses and think driving a Cybertruck is a sign of virility. Nearly every one of the 16 matches I received during testing was Christian and wanting children ASAP, which Tai flagged each time as a potential issue. Many were also flagged initially by Tai because they only wanted to date a certain race or valued traditional gender roles, both of which I made clear that I wasn’t aligned with.
Out of journalistic duty, I accepted every match I received; even a MMA-loving body builder that enjoys grilling meat (I’m vegan) and going to the gun range (I’m generally anti-gun). Matches ranged from Portland, Oregon, to DC, to New York City (where I live, although most matches were outside NYC). Overall, not a single person I was matched with would be someone I’d swipe right on if I saw them on a traditional dating app.
If you accept, you’ll either need to wait for the other person to accept or pass on the match, or they will have already accepted, and you can begin chatting. Here, your AI dating coach steps in to play wingman, providing prompts based on the other person’s profile, highlighting similarities you have, and giving conversation questions based on answers from the match’s profile. Not only does the coach provide potential ice breakers (and responses), you can also chat and ask for pointers.
Three Day Rule via Molly Higgins
I asked it to give me tips on how to break the ice with new matches, and it gave me advice, with each point having an explanatory paragraph below. Advice included giving compliments, asking open-ended questions, using humor, referencing current events, sharing about yourself, and mentioning mutual interests. The advice was basic but solid, and mirrored what the coach was doing with the provided conversation prompts.
This is all a great idea in theory, and could be very helpful with people who have a tough time communicating with strangers. But it could also lead to a bigger problem. You don’t really know who you’ve been talking to if AI has been doing all of the chatting for you. And if you meet in person, you don’t know much about your date’s actual personality. You can tell so much from how people type, what questions they ask, and their sense of humor. That was all missing here.
Source link
#Ditched #Hinge #Matchmaker #Mixed #Results
![John Grisham’s New Legal Drama Is a Real Life Fight Against AI Audiobooks on YouTube
There’s an argument to be made that audiobooks are the finest form of content. You take a book—already off to a good start—and you get to have someone read it right into your ears. And when I say “someone” I mean the GOATs in the voice game. I could cite examples of celebrities you never knew narrated audiobooks, but here’s a sample of Werner Herzog narrating his memoir Every Man for Himself and God Against All that I think speaks for itself: [embed]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P4IQSvi3pXU[/embed] What could be better than this? Not only are audiobooks heaven, you can probably get all the audiobooks you want for free (and legally) by getting yourself a library card and using your local library’s preferred app (Libby, perhaps). I say all that, because given all the easy and free access to high quality audiobooks, why in the world would anyone listen to a John Grisham audiobook presented like this?
Don’t click that link. Instead of the actual audiobook, which is read wonderfully by Michael Beck, it will take you to a YouTube video consisting of an AI narrator reading Grisham’s recent hit novel the Widow, and the narration plays under 13 hours of AI slop video—simulated stock footage of fake vacations, basically. It looks like the video they display under the lyrics on Hell’s karaoke machine. I don’t have any science to back this up, but it will definitely give you brain cancer.
As the New York Times points out, 80,000 lost souls listened to the Widow this way. And Grisham is pissed about it. “The thieves and pirates who steal my work and try to profit from it, in any format, should be punished civilly and criminally […] And in this particular example, YouTube is complicit because it’s clear they know what is happening and refuse to stop it,” Grisham told the Times in an email. He should really write about this. YouTube, for its part, says the video is still up because there hasn’t been a takedown request, and that it doesn’t proactively police for copyright violations. “For more than two decades, we’ve built systems that help rights holders manage and control their copyrighted content — investing continuously to make sure those systems evolve as new threats emerge,” Jack Malon, a YouTube spokesperson, wrote to the Times.
If you’ve ever had a YouTube video flagged for a copyright violation, it may have been because of a feature called Content ID that music publishers absolutely love. It allows copyright holders to crawl YouTube and automatically detect copyrighted content. At times, Content ID has been a valuable moneymaking scheme for copyright holders, who were able to zero in on incidental—or even accidental—uses of copyrighted material, especially music, and by making a claim, monetize other people’s videos. It can’t do this anymore, but this is the sort of thing YouTube’s copyright system has been designed to support. As the Times points out, Content ID isn’t great at finding AI-narrated audiobooks. The audio waveform of the content is not the same as the audio the publisher owns, which makes it tricky to know what to even scan for. The author holds a copyright on the text, which can be slightly changed by the creator of the YouTube video while still leaving the book largely intact—good enough for casual listeners anyway. This leaves publishers and authors to navigate the takedown process manually, which seems, judging from the fact that the Widow is still up, to just not be happening.
That’s a pity. And I don’t mean because it’s robbing John Grisham of audiobook sales, which is bad, but not the gravest injustice in the universe. It’s bad because people are listening to such horrible garbage just because it’s available. And they really, truly, don’t have to. #John #Grishams #Legal #Drama #Real #Life #Fight #Audiobooks #YouTubeArtificial intelligence,Audiobooks,Books,intellectual proper John Grisham’s New Legal Drama Is a Real Life Fight Against AI Audiobooks on YouTube
There’s an argument to be made that audiobooks are the finest form of content. You take a book—already off to a good start—and you get to have someone read it right into your ears. And when I say “someone” I mean the GOATs in the voice game. I could cite examples of celebrities you never knew narrated audiobooks, but here’s a sample of Werner Herzog narrating his memoir Every Man for Himself and God Against All that I think speaks for itself: [embed]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P4IQSvi3pXU[/embed] What could be better than this? Not only are audiobooks heaven, you can probably get all the audiobooks you want for free (and legally) by getting yourself a library card and using your local library’s preferred app (Libby, perhaps). I say all that, because given all the easy and free access to high quality audiobooks, why in the world would anyone listen to a John Grisham audiobook presented like this?
Don’t click that link. Instead of the actual audiobook, which is read wonderfully by Michael Beck, it will take you to a YouTube video consisting of an AI narrator reading Grisham’s recent hit novel the Widow, and the narration plays under 13 hours of AI slop video—simulated stock footage of fake vacations, basically. It looks like the video they display under the lyrics on Hell’s karaoke machine. I don’t have any science to back this up, but it will definitely give you brain cancer.
As the New York Times points out, 80,000 lost souls listened to the Widow this way. And Grisham is pissed about it. “The thieves and pirates who steal my work and try to profit from it, in any format, should be punished civilly and criminally […] And in this particular example, YouTube is complicit because it’s clear they know what is happening and refuse to stop it,” Grisham told the Times in an email. He should really write about this. YouTube, for its part, says the video is still up because there hasn’t been a takedown request, and that it doesn’t proactively police for copyright violations. “For more than two decades, we’ve built systems that help rights holders manage and control their copyrighted content — investing continuously to make sure those systems evolve as new threats emerge,” Jack Malon, a YouTube spokesperson, wrote to the Times.
If you’ve ever had a YouTube video flagged for a copyright violation, it may have been because of a feature called Content ID that music publishers absolutely love. It allows copyright holders to crawl YouTube and automatically detect copyrighted content. At times, Content ID has been a valuable moneymaking scheme for copyright holders, who were able to zero in on incidental—or even accidental—uses of copyrighted material, especially music, and by making a claim, monetize other people’s videos. It can’t do this anymore, but this is the sort of thing YouTube’s copyright system has been designed to support. As the Times points out, Content ID isn’t great at finding AI-narrated audiobooks. The audio waveform of the content is not the same as the audio the publisher owns, which makes it tricky to know what to even scan for. The author holds a copyright on the text, which can be slightly changed by the creator of the YouTube video while still leaving the book largely intact—good enough for casual listeners anyway. This leaves publishers and authors to navigate the takedown process manually, which seems, judging from the fact that the Widow is still up, to just not be happening.
That’s a pity. And I don’t mean because it’s robbing John Grisham of audiobook sales, which is bad, but not the gravest injustice in the universe. It’s bad because people are listening to such horrible garbage just because it’s available. And they really, truly, don’t have to. #John #Grishams #Legal #Drama #Real #Life #Fight #Audiobooks #YouTubeArtificial intelligence,Audiobooks,Books,intellectual proper](https://gizmodo.com/app/uploads/2026/05/john-grisham-1280x853.jpg)

Post Comment