[jazz3020]

> Meaning you “generated” 73k “summaries” of which you are wholly unable to verify the content of because it would require you to have read the books and listened to/read the “summaries”.

No, we generate summaries on the fly, too. Why would you generate all the summaries in advance when you can summarize real-time when a user clicks on it?

> What is with sloppybros and thinking quantity is more desirable than quality?

Have you read any of our summaries? Go ahead and read a summary of a book you've actually read and let me know what it's lacking. IMO, our summaries are way more thorough than human-written counterparts. And the structure is consistent across the entire catalog. In other words, we offer both quality and quantity.

> What motivated you to “remove” this fact from your website? Legitimate criticism?

No, just a matter of branding. We thought "AI" might add a cool factor, but everyone's AI nowadays, so we're just differentiating. Also, we didn't care to buy the ".ai" domain either. Most people already know it's AI-powered without us letting them know.

[rurp]

> Why would you generate all the summaries in advance when you can summarize real-time when a user clicks on it?

Well the most obvious reason is that the summary page would load faster. I clicked on a book summary and it took much longer to render than even a bloated web app usually takes.

73k summaries isn't that many. If your site gets any traction most of those summaries will be hit repeatedly and will have to generate anyway. Creating the summaries in advance would also allow you to test and verify the output, if you're interested in that.

[jazz3020]

Okay, that's fair. It isn't that many, but it's still 10x more than the industry leader, Blinkist, though. A good start.

As a small company, we currently need to sacrifice the first reader's experience for the sake of spreading out the costs over time. But every subsequent read is cached!

[ubggret]

> No, we generate summaries on the fly, too.

Yikes, so the summaries change with each viewing?

Information that changes each time you read it is by definition “unreliable”.

> Go ahead and read a summary of a book you've actually read and let me know what it's lacking.

Work for a sloppyjoe? And for free?!

Come on. I think you have clearly grown a little too accustom to exploiting other peoples’ work.

Hey, just have your AIs check them all. Right?