Re: Summary/Minutes from today's FESCo Meeting (2024-07-09)

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Thu, 11 Jul 2024 at 11:34, Josh Boyer <jwboyer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jul 10, 2024 at 12:46 PM Daniel P. Berrangé <berrange@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Jul 10, 2024 at 09:36:35AM -0400, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> > > I'm guessing Josh's response was an attempt to use AI to generate a
> > > summary. In the future, please label it as such, so people will read
> > > it with a critical eye. It has some flaws which I will address inline:
> >
> > If content is labelled as written by AI I'd skip reading it entirely.
> > Reading "with a critical eye" implies we have to either guess (or
> > research) which parts are accurate and which are wrong, neither option
> > being desirable.
> >
> > I'd ask for human written summaries, or none at all, in prefence to
> > misleading AI summaries.
>
> Human in the loop is of course important.  The intention would be to
> have FESCo review any AI generated content for accuracy before sending
> it out.  From a consumer perspective, you get content that has been
> validated by a human and you should be able to trust it like you would
> any other email sent.
>
> If FESCo doesn't want to use AI at all, I don't care.  I just want
> better summaries than what zodbot is currently providing (which aren't
> reviewed either afaics...)
>

The 'summaries' are just what the person running the meeting is
collecting during the meeting while trying to also keep the meeting
running AND be a participant of the meeting. The person doing this is
a volunteer and generally has zero training in note taking, running
meetings or a dozen other things which are expected. If better notes
are expected, then better training or having an agreed upon
professional whose sole job is this task is generally needed.

I don't know if the AI summary came from the general notes of the
meeting or if it was built off the actual conversations between
people. If it was built off of
https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/meeting_matrix_fedoraproject-org/2024-07-09/fesco.2024-07-09-17.00.log.txt
like a professional transcriber (or whatever the role is called these
days), then the next step is to send it around to the participants for
'approval'. This is why various meetings start off with a 'approval of
the previous minutes' at the start of a meeting so that people who
need to make corrections can do so and corrections can be voted on as
needed.

If LLMs become this 'professional' body, then there will probably need
to be an open way to know their 'credentials' to make sure that
summaries are fair.
What was the tool and dataset used
What was the 'meeting' data fed to the tool
What was the query (or queries) used
What were the retraining queries used to change 'summaries' that were
found to be wrong.


-- 
Stephen Smoogen, Red Hat Automotive
Let us be kind to one another, for most of us are fighting a hard
battle. -- Ian MacClaren

-- 
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue




[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Announce]     [Fedora Users]     [Fedora Kernel]     [Fedora Testing]     [Fedora Formulas]     [Fedora PHP Devel]     [Kernel Development]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Maintainers]     [Fedora Desktop]     [PAM]     [Red Hat Development]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]

  Powered by Linux