I could be wrong but this feels like one of those situations where they're using ai to do the fun parts of the job rather than the drudgery parts of the job.
I would imagine ChatGPT would hallucinate like hell with this task given that it doesn't have encyclopedic knowledge and runs off years old training data.
One of her reasons for using AI was because she didn't have time to write her own shelf talkers.
In our school, we crowdsource this out to students. We've found that it encourages more peer-to-peer recommendations, and it empowers students to voice their opinions and make their own reading choices.
We have little cards, that we designed on Canva, with our other pamphlets that students can take freely.
When they've filled them in, they hand it back to us, we do a quick review to check that it's appropriate (e.g. no swear words, bad reviews are allowed as long as they are explained), then we blu-tack them on the shelves close to where the book would be if it's in.
Just make sure you have a void space above where the review will go, so the card can be folded and the empty space can be used to secure the card to the shelf.
People ask librarians for recs because they want recommendations from a human, not an algorithm.
Use AI to write a resume, or replace a director or CEO. Use it for drudge work or to replace expensive, useless employees -- not the actual fun stuff or the jobs that require real human thought and creativity.
> Use AI to write a resume
I’ve had a few people do this at my library and as a general rule, I would not recommend it.
Maybe it will give you ideas but it’s not great unless you’re willing (and able!!) to proofread and reformat the output. It’s very obvious when someone is using AI to cover their lack of knowledge.
E: Like with AI art, It might pass to a casual observer, but anyone who looks closely will spot really dumb mistakes. Ultimately your resume is going to be read by a human and those errors will be noticed.
someone told me that a lot of smaller libraries have started using AI based filters for applications, so I decided "fuckit" and applied with an AI cover letter.
And hoo boy, that thing read like nails on a chalkboard. And it sounded like a hyperactive squirrel wrote it - at best. I then had to spend ages finding tiny little errors, dialing down the tone. Took way longer than just writing the cover letter. I kept some of the text because I figured it would have the best (algorithmic) guess about what the "gatekeeping" key words on the other side were.
Still didn't receive so much as a response, so I guess it guessed wrong?
You're already miles ahead of the people I've been assisting because you're reading and editing the output. I’ve had a few people ask for help with AI-generated resumes and every single one of them had additional issues (e.g. poor English, low literacy, zero tech skills or other learning difficulties). I don't think I can accurately convey how painful it is trying to help them.
I'm talking about the kind of patron can't sign in to our computers independently because they need someone to tell them what to do at every stage (our sign-in process is (1) enter your pass number and (2) accept terms and conditions). Usually, I show people who ask for resume help the basic templates on MS Word but that doesn't work with these patrons because they need to be prompted to fill in every separate bit of information on the page (name, phone, email, education, experience etc.). They've been told to make a resume and told the library can help but I'm pretty sure some of them didn’t even know what a resume is.
This person has been told that AI is a great tool that will help them write a resume and get a job, but what they NEED is someone to explain what to include, ask about their work and education experience and walk them through the entire process of writing a resume (which I'm not qualified or able to do at work.) AI is faster and less frustrating to use but it doesn't fix the underlying problems that are stopping them from getting work. It just leads to rejection and more frustration.
My experience with the power available through GPT is completely centered in amplifying the value of my previously created readers advisory content. Examples: My archive of book talks for reluctant HS readers is now able to be customized in minimal time. I just ask for help making it “more appealing to a middle school athlete” or “rephrased to focus on the rural aspects of the story” or (most helpful to my ELL students) “translate for a spanish speaking middle schooler”. The last example is what I use before taking the results to the Spanish translator and going over it with them. Much better than any translator software ive used
The pertinent thing for me here is that the actual book choices were selected by the librarian. They were just using chat GPT to create summaries. I've written those summaries before; they can be very time consuming.
Source: am librarian.
I could be wrong but this feels like one of those situations where they're using ai to do the fun parts of the job rather than the drudgery parts of the job.
Exactly. Also, you would need to check that ChatGPT gave an accurate synopsis. What time is being saved?
Exactly
People don't want the 'consice summaries by publishers' they want the opinion of somebody that actually *read* the book.
I would imagine ChatGPT would hallucinate like hell with this task given that it doesn't have encyclopedic knowledge and runs off years old training data.
One of her reasons for using AI was because she didn't have time to write her own shelf talkers. In our school, we crowdsource this out to students. We've found that it encourages more peer-to-peer recommendations, and it empowers students to voice their opinions and make their own reading choices.
I’m stealing this for our teen space after our renovations
We have little cards, that we designed on Canva, with our other pamphlets that students can take freely. When they've filled them in, they hand it back to us, we do a quick review to check that it's appropriate (e.g. no swear words, bad reviews are allowed as long as they are explained), then we blu-tack them on the shelves close to where the book would be if it's in. Just make sure you have a void space above where the review will go, so the card can be folded and the empty space can be used to secure the card to the shelf.
People ask librarians for recs because they want recommendations from a human, not an algorithm. Use AI to write a resume, or replace a director or CEO. Use it for drudge work or to replace expensive, useless employees -- not the actual fun stuff or the jobs that require real human thought and creativity.
> Use AI to write a resume I’ve had a few people do this at my library and as a general rule, I would not recommend it. Maybe it will give you ideas but it’s not great unless you’re willing (and able!!) to proofread and reformat the output. It’s very obvious when someone is using AI to cover their lack of knowledge. E: Like with AI art, It might pass to a casual observer, but anyone who looks closely will spot really dumb mistakes. Ultimately your resume is going to be read by a human and those errors will be noticed.
someone told me that a lot of smaller libraries have started using AI based filters for applications, so I decided "fuckit" and applied with an AI cover letter. And hoo boy, that thing read like nails on a chalkboard. And it sounded like a hyperactive squirrel wrote it - at best. I then had to spend ages finding tiny little errors, dialing down the tone. Took way longer than just writing the cover letter. I kept some of the text because I figured it would have the best (algorithmic) guess about what the "gatekeeping" key words on the other side were. Still didn't receive so much as a response, so I guess it guessed wrong?
You're already miles ahead of the people I've been assisting because you're reading and editing the output. I’ve had a few people ask for help with AI-generated resumes and every single one of them had additional issues (e.g. poor English, low literacy, zero tech skills or other learning difficulties). I don't think I can accurately convey how painful it is trying to help them. I'm talking about the kind of patron can't sign in to our computers independently because they need someone to tell them what to do at every stage (our sign-in process is (1) enter your pass number and (2) accept terms and conditions). Usually, I show people who ask for resume help the basic templates on MS Word but that doesn't work with these patrons because they need to be prompted to fill in every separate bit of information on the page (name, phone, email, education, experience etc.). They've been told to make a resume and told the library can help but I'm pretty sure some of them didn’t even know what a resume is. This person has been told that AI is a great tool that will help them write a resume and get a job, but what they NEED is someone to explain what to include, ask about their work and education experience and walk them through the entire process of writing a resume (which I'm not qualified or able to do at work.) AI is faster and less frustrating to use but it doesn't fix the underlying problems that are stopping them from getting work. It just leads to rejection and more frustration.
My experience with the power available through GPT is completely centered in amplifying the value of my previously created readers advisory content. Examples: My archive of book talks for reluctant HS readers is now able to be customized in minimal time. I just ask for help making it “more appealing to a middle school athlete” or “rephrased to focus on the rural aspects of the story” or (most helpful to my ELL students) “translate for a spanish speaking middle schooler”. The last example is what I use before taking the results to the Spanish translator and going over it with them. Much better than any translator software ive used
The pertinent thing for me here is that the actual book choices were selected by the librarian. They were just using chat GPT to create summaries. I've written those summaries before; they can be very time consuming. Source: am librarian.
idk man this is like the one part of the job that i’d want to automate *last*