Live data from Hacker News

Ask HN: Should HN ban ChatGPT/generated responses?

news.ycombinator.com

351–360 of 677 posts

Re: Ask HN: Should HN ban ChatGPT/generated responses?

#351
post #24

The fact that soon the internet will be so flooded with bots that you'll be floating eternally alone in a sea of imposters unless we create some draconian real person ID system is a tragedy so great it's crazy it has not dawned on people yet. I started out loving the net because of the feelings of connection and partly because of the honesty and discussions stemming from at least pseudo anonymity, both silly stuff an…

In the near term we will have to start Turing testing our conversation partners. You can about a current event, because these models have a training date cutoff. For example, ask them what the top story on the news was yesterday.

The next step is live training, I wouldn't give it more than a year or so.

Re: Ask HN: Should HN ban ChatGPT/generated responses?

#352

One thing I’m guilty of on this site is not upvoting enough. I vote down the banality and flag the pollution. Upvoting doesn’t seem to come as naturally — whenever I read an interesting response it’s the last thing on my mind. It’s a good thing really. Interesting stories and comments are the norm. I wonder what the userDB says about any scarcity of upvoters? Are there many others like me? Am I not pulling my weight?…

The UI for voting in general isn’t great and gives me anxiety on mobile so I almost never click it. With my sausage fingers it’d be good if the clickable area was bigger and up voting had some CTA…

- The header to the right of the vote buttons shows "unvote" or 'undown" after voting. So you can at least see if you fat-fingered someone down in error and fix the mistake.

- On mobile, Android, I use Materialistic to read HN. The UI is much better than the web version, and voting uses a standard mobile UI element (or swipe, but I don't use that). You can't downvote in Materialistic, only upvote, so if you're worried about accidental downvoting that goes away.

Re: Ask HN: Should HN ban ChatGPT/generated responses?

#353

One thing I’m guilty of on this site is not upvoting enough. I vote down the banality and flag the pollution. Upvoting doesn’t seem to come as naturally — whenever I read an interesting response it’s the last thing on my mind. It’s a good thing really. Interesting stories and comments are the norm. I wonder what the userDB says about any scarcity of upvoters? Are there many others like me? Am I not pulling my weight?…

I am the opposite. I vote up easily, but think a hundred times before downvoting. Downvoting feels like censorship to me.

Re: Ask HN: Should HN ban ChatGPT/generated responses?

#354
post #218

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Based on what I’ve seen, ChatGPT has some disastrous responses. I asked it yesterday if it made sense to speak of partial derivatives in single-variable calculus and it made an absolute carnage of the response. I could not steer it with prompts towards something intelligible - it only produced jank. I do not want people who cannot answer a question in the first place to copy-paste ChatGPT responses, just like it has…

Really? Because this is what I got: "Me: How do partial derivative apply in one dimensional calculus? In one-dimensional calculus, a partial derivative is a derivative taken with respect to one variable, while treating all other variables as constants. For example, if a function f(x,y) depends on two variables x and y, the partial derivative of f with respect to x is denoted as ∂f/∂x, and it represents the rate at wh…

> seems

Suppose you can consult an expert, or some bookworm who suffered from strokes that impaired judgement while preserving intaken notions.

Re: Ask HN: Should HN ban ChatGPT/generated responses?

#355

One thing I’m guilty of on this site is not upvoting enough. I vote down the banality and flag the pollution. Upvoting doesn’t seem to come as naturally — whenever I read an interesting response it’s the last thing on my mind. It’s a good thing really. Interesting stories and comments are the norm. I wonder what the userDB says about any scarcity of upvoters? Are there many others like me? Am I not pulling my weight?…

The UI for voting in general isn’t great and gives me anxiety on mobile so I almost never click it. With my sausage fingers it’d be good if the clickable area was bigger and up voting had some CTA…

FWIW, on mobile, I use https://f-droid.org/en/packages/io.github.hidroh.materialist... rather than the website, so I don't have that issue.

Re: Ask HN: Should HN ban ChatGPT/generated responses?

#357
post #87
post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If we reach the point where the humans simply can't do better, well, then it won't matter. I disagree with this. The exact same comment written by a human is more valuable than one written by a bot. For example imagine I relate something that actually happened to me vs a bot making up a story. Byte for byte identical stories. They could be realistic, and have several good lessons baked in. Yet one is more valuable,…

Good point! I didn't really think that bit through.

> For example imagine I relate something that actually happened to me vs a bot making up a story. Byte for byte identical stories. They could be realistic, and have several good lessons baked in. Yet one is more valuable, because it is true.

I disagree, since something that actually happened to you is anecdotal experience and therefore of very limited “good lesson” value.

An AI generated story that reflects and illustrates a data driven majority of experiences and resulting “lessons” would be much more valuable to me than your solitary true story, which may be a total statistical outlier, and therefore should not inform my decision making.

Kahneman explains it much better than I can, and in his book “Thinking fast and thinking slow”, he quotes studies and statistical analysis, how we as humans are commonly led to faulty decision making, because personal experience (“true stories”) tends to become our primary decision influencer - even if we have access to statistics that suggest the opposite of our own experience is the much more common experience.

So if the AI gives me access to a summarized better overall data based truth, wrapped into a made-up story (to help me remember better), then I would much prefer the AI to guide my decision making.

Re: Ask HN: Should HN ban ChatGPT/generated responses?

#358

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of course there is, but it’s definitely weird when the jokes only funny when it’s not easy to think of it as a real possibility! In someways this thread sounds like the real first step in the raise of true AI, in a weird banal encroachment kind of way.

I think it would be really interesting to see threads on Hackernews start with an AI digestion of the article and surrounding discussion. This could provide a helpful summary and context for readers, and also potentially highlight important points and counterpoints in the conversation. It would be a great way to use AI to enhance the user experience on the site. I routinely use AI to help me communicate. Like Aaron t…

This has already started happening at wikipedia : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2...

Re: Ask HN: Should HN ban ChatGPT/generated responses?

#359

One thing I’m guilty of on this site is not upvoting enough. I vote down the banality and flag the pollution. Upvoting doesn’t seem to come as naturally — whenever I read an interesting response it’s the last thing on my mind. It’s a good thing really. Interesting stories and comments are the norm. I wonder what the userDB says about any scarcity of upvoters? Are there many others like me? Am I not pulling my weight?…

Upvoting is more effort than scrolling. I downvote bad or trollish takes, I upvote stuff I strongly agree with or generally great, effortful comments (sometimes even when I disagree! But sadly I'm not humble enough to do that often). I read the vast majority without upvoting.

Re: Ask HN: Should HN ban ChatGPT/generated responses?

#360
post #178
post #24

The fact that soon the internet will be so flooded with bots that you'll be floating eternally alone in a sea of imposters unless we create some draconian real person ID system is a tragedy so great it's crazy it has not dawned on people yet. I started out loving the net because of the feelings of connection and partly because of the honesty and discussions stemming from at least pseudo anonymity, both silly stuff an…

People won't be flooding the net unless there is an incentive. Right now it is google's ads that are driving content generation. If chatbots are used widely instead of google, there will be less incentive to making filler content. And if the web gets flooded with bot content, it will only hasten the demise of google. Either way the thing will balance out

You're ignoring political incentive such as the anti-Israel drives. They will certainly flood discussions with by-the-way offhand mentions of "Israeli brutality" in otherwise seemingly innocuous comments on other subjects. There was a spate of this last year, then it subsided, and I would not be surprised to see another wave come, this time automated.
Post reply on HN