[jazzyjackson]

Hi, the articles are very readable so if its AI writing this count me impressed, but the explanations on bigbird.dev don't give me a lot of confidence, since their is a lot of focus on big bird templating the news and letting a human edit it... I would really like to see transparency in whether something I'm reading is machine generated (from what source material?) or human edited (by what human?)

And just because I'm being critical, this line at the bottom of your site claiming 20,000% growth 1 day after launch is... just making me think of how 1 is infinitely more views than 0.

[bigbird-media]

When we do get customers, we'll definitely ensure it's stamped that it was generated using our engine :). If we actually get somewhere with this (in terms of funding/customers), our first priority is getting in a specialized ethics team on board

Right now we've heard that for time-sensitive info (like sports) it's easier to generate an article from us and edit off of that to get the point across. We're still implementing fact-checking algorithms to ensure quality and credibility. (check out Wapo's Heliograf [0])

And yes, you've caught on! We were doing like 50 page views to one day 10,000. I'll remove it soon because as you've explained, it doesn't make sense.

[0]: https://www.washingtonpost.com/pr/wp/2017/09/01/the-washingt...

[DonHopkins]

>first priority is getting in a specialized ethics team on board

Sean Spicer is available!

[wyxuan]

Yeah, same with the "our product is used by many media outlets"or describing this as your first "customer"

But hey, fake it till you make it

[bigbird-media]

We technically do have a customer although they're not paying for it. Just want to see how they're using it to iterate on the product.

But yeah I do agree I have to take that off... sounds a bit outlandish in retrospect.