Sounds like a normal news broadcaster voice to me. I suppose the inflection is a bit over-the-top. The speaker says her name at the end - Leila Beaudoi.
It sounded very odd to me too. I was wondering if that was normal for Newfoundland maybe. To be honest it didn't sound AI, more like it was played back slightly too slow, but not by a constant amount.
Newfoundlander here checking in! Nope. She just sounds like that. Another comment mentioned it seems to be a CBC/traditional news thing. A bunch of them sound that way.
The "accent" here is starting to fade out of the younger generations but it sounds Irish to a naive ear.
They are certainly LLM-generated. I'm sure it's been done, but I would love to see a comprehensive look into what it is exactly that makes a UI seem LLM-generated.
From what I can tell, the issues are: Fonts are too small, secondary fonts have terrible contrast with their backgrounds, information is too dense/not enough white space, overuse of blinking/glowing status dots, overuse of bordered elements, and overuse of accented elements. I am surely forgetting some other issues.
I'm not sure why there seems to be a consistent set of design mistakes that LLMs tend toward.
Lack of visual hierarchy. Lots of use of bold text to make numbers stand out, without bolding the corresponding labels. Reliance on heavily-saturated primary colors. Limited attention paid to alignment.
LLMs in general are pretty terrible at spatial arrangement. You should see some of the architects' critiques of AI-generated floorplans that are on YouTube; the LLM generates a layout that is just nuts. I've found them largely useless at putting together UI mocks; Figma or Photoshop is still way easier to work with if you just want to cut up UI elements and rearrange them.
I'm not sure I would consider it too dense. If anything I think they tend to be too sparse, although this could just be that they're often used for marketing type sites, which seem to want to make you scroll and click a lot for anything anyway, even if you have the screen space.
The status dots are a part of animations in general, which they overuse, especially things like transform/scale on hover and hover effects on many many elements.
I think it's not simply borders but contrasting-color borders often with box shadows.
> I'm not sure why there seems to be a consistent set of design mistakes that LLMs tend toward.
Probably something to do with the training data and how it’s weighted. It’s the same how the writing is essentially full of overused phrases, the AI slop feel.
> New developers are having an extremely hard time learning enough skills to be gainfully employed. They are drowning in this complex garbage and feeling really disheartened.
> We need to relearn what the web is capable of and go back to that.
> And it [the web] has only gotten better over time while retaining an incredible level of backwards compatibility.
I would suggest that "retaining an incredible level of backwards compatibility" might be one of the sources of this "complex garbage" the web world is drowning in.
The fact that so many people feel the need to reach for a framework makes me wonder if the web doesn't do nearly as much as it needs to do.
Maybe the web will always just be too big, too slow to change, and too bad at pruning out all of the bad ideas that accumulated over the years.
"But what about backwards compatibility? Don't we want all the old web apps to continue to work forever?" Yes, so ship the renderer with the app.
Sure, the current web is probably beyond being able to this, but I'm sure we'll eventually find a far better way to distribute software than the web, a way that makes fewer assumptions about the environment our code will run in.
At the time of writing this, the linked-to Google Sheet redirects to an html-only view with this message: "Some tools might be unavailable due to heavy traffic in this file." In this html-only view, while the user can still see the entire list of sheets at the top, in-document links to other sheets do not work, and some text overflows its cell and is not visible.
Most important information appears to be visible still, but those who wish to add to or edit the document seem to be out of luck.
What went wrong? Perhaps each Google Sheet has access throttling, not ideal for users of high-traffic docs like this, especially if the users have critical information to share.
And yet, what other tool should they have used?
We need collaborative, easily-shareable, WYSIWYG document editors for situations just like this, except of course, their access should not be throttled, and their content should be discoverable by search engines.
Do we need a new web? A web whose content is able to be directly manipulated? A web that is collaborative by default?
Perhaps some sort of Fediverse Google Docs/Sheets equivalent? Where each user can host their own copy (if they want) and the pub/sub algorithm ensures that it's all eventually consistent, if higher latency than something inherently centralized like Google?
