I asked ChatGPT to summarize 14501 books in 5 bullet points. Here's the result
bookpecker.com
bookpecker.com
I mean, if homo sapiens could reliably prioritize long-term payoffs over short-term ones, the world would look very different.
This could be easily implemented with langchain for example.
It's funny because whenever I read these books I feel like someone just took a bunch of bullet points and then added anecdotes and fluff to make it fill a book. Herd you're reversing the process.
> Many times the author tries to say the same thing 20 different times to fill a book. Many of those books could have been a great 30 minute presentation.
This is indeed how many, many of these books started -- as a $x minute presentation or an article.I always try to find the source presentation or article and consume that before reading a book. It has served me well. You get the core ideas, concisely, without the fluff.
The bullet points it gave were were somewhat accurate at points, although I would say that the timeline and relationships wrong at some points. His childhood caretaker became a "woman he had a relationship with" later on, which was a complete mischaracterization. I think the regular version, sans the book text, might be more accurate (as it is probably based on Wikipedia / etc..)
Not sure if any of this goes against copyright law, though...
EDIT: I wonder what would be the outcome of summarize all 1500 books together in 5 bullet points (like a single summary for all books)
https://twitter.com/BookReviewAi
I find the results very interesting. Like this "The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy" one.
—Woody Allen
The sentences could be longer if that helps.
Great little tool!
Did you actually ask for bullet points and ChatGPT gave you numbered points instead? Or did you just ask for 5 point summaries and it chose to use numbered points?
For the books I checked where I felt I could reasonably guess what topics would be covered and in what order, the 5 points seemed to cover things in the same order I expect the book covered them.
If that is the case numbered points would be more appropriate than bullet points, so if it was ChatGPT that decided on numbers vs. bullets it looks like it made the right call.
And did you ask it first what subject would be interesting to HN readers?
https://aicopyright.substack.com/p/has-your-book-been-used-t...
But we're talking about behemoth companies here, one of which deigns to make a pitch worth 7 Trillion dollars (10% of global GDP).
So... they're trying to rake in investment at levels that are unheard of in human history. Surpassing Apollo, the Manhattan project, the great pyramids of Egypt, the Great Wall of China, and anything else one might think of.
And they're not paying for the books ???