Right now, I'm doing this very manually, but am actually thinking of switching my browser just to have this capability baked in.
EDIT: Since everyone is asking why and how I use summaries, here's an example: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40881021
I fucking read, like absolutely everyone and their dog did two years ago before this pest stole everyone's attention.
Sure, and 10% of the time you get something that's lies which you don't get from actual reading.
But for a lot of non-fiction content, I think it's perfectly legitimate and common to have some specific piece of information you're looking to extract, or want a rundown of key highlights.
For both, I'd say it could also help in choosing which content to read. Books already typically have a form of summary on the back. If you're researching something, you're going to have to determine which articles are relevant before reading every article top to bottom - and a summary seems helpful for that.
Most of the time, I don't want a summary of an article. If the article is really good and I want to know the most important details, then I should read the article. Maybe I can write a summary myself, so that I can use it for future reference.
If an article is bad, then why would I care about a summary? I wouldn't read it either way.
There is a a possibility that an article is actually really good, but it's badly written, or way too verbose, or I don't understand the language/terminology/topic. In these cases, a simpler summary written by someone else (or an LLM, I guess...) would be useful. Domain-specific articles or scientific papers would fall into this category for me. Even for this subset of articles, if I don't really understand the topic being discussed, would a summary really give me any benefits? I still don't understand the topic well enough for it to be useful to me. I would get more out of actually trying to read the article and studying the material being discussed.
This is active reading, not some robo-moron digesting an article, shitting it out and then spoon-feeding the contents of the toilet-bowl back to you.
I just don't read it in the first place.
Will you miss some cool stuff? Yes
Will you still encounter time wasters? Yes
We are consuming too much and not doing enough productively ourselves.
I either read articles that are 1) fun to read and silly, or 2) fun to read and informative. If they're not fun to read, it's unlikely that the content is any good. Good educators often know how to write in an engaging way. If the content is difficult to read, or super lengthy, it's probably shit content.
How do you judge quality of the information you're given when you have it summarized? How do you make sure the LLM didn't misunderstand something, like sarcasm, or a quote, etc.?
Gruber has always been loquacious, but this one seemed excessive to me. Still, I was curious for his overall impressions on Apple Intelligence.
The summary sounded interesting to me, so I then dedicated time to read the source. To your credit, ChatGPT's summary was much more critical than the actual article.
Then why are you reading it? You’re conditioning yourself to have a mental corpus of uninteresting, unimportant drivel. At best, that’s a waste of time.