Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Drowning in AI Generated Garbage: the silent war we are fighting

ploum.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 452 posts

Re: Drowning in AI Generated Garbage: the silent war we are fighting

#101

Post by oneseven »

Mountain_Skies wrote: post #29
jorgemf wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the problem you are describing is not only about AI, it is about trusting your sources of information. I can happen with content from humans.

I have cookbooks, both physical and in digital formats, but it's usually faster to do a web search, especially when I mostly need cooking time and temperature. Perhaps this will motivate me to finally get around the setting up a local search function for my electronic cookbook collection as the web is going to be less and less trustworthy.

Have a look at

https://www.eatyourbooks.com/

not sure if they do ebooks.

Re: Drowning in AI Generated Garbage: the silent war we are fighting

#102

Post by 2devnull »

srge wrote: post #75
2devnull wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you didn’t think the web wasn’t full of bullshit before you won’t be too disappointed.

Well I won’t be surprised if we all end up regretting the current level of bullshit. Fast.

Fair enough. It’s like the lump of labor fallacy, but for bullshit rather than labor. One could view that as growing pains, but it is still growth in some sense.

Re: Drowning in AI Generated Garbage: the silent war we are fighting

#103

Post by GaggiX »

nottorp wrote: post #93
GaggiX wrote: post #65

AI training on AI-generated images works like a very complicated Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback (RLHF), only the best images have a chance to be relevant enough to be noticed by a scraper, after being selected by the user who used the AI, and they have probably been shared several times by random people. Also, a lot of AI-generated content doesn't look like trash to me, I've seen a lot of good images, the…

> Also, a lot of AI-generated content doesn't look like trash to me, I've seen a lot of good images Translation: There is a lot of human generated original art that you're not aware of, and when you see it in the "AI"'s output you think it's original.

So you are implying that an image generated by a generative model must resemble closely to an image in the dataset, right? Because I don't think that's true, you can try to prove me wrong if you want, I'll give you a useful resource, the LAION dataset that Stable Diffusion was trained with is completely open, generate or find an image generated by Stable Diffusion and find the most semantically similar images in the dataset using: https://rom1504.github.io/clip-retrieval

Re: Drowning in AI Generated Garbage: the silent war we are fighting

#104

Post by goodpoint »

srge wrote: post #14

It is a real problem. The web will soon be full of AI generated bullshit. What might come back as useful tool? Authorship. People actually signing the content and putting their reputation on the line. It still exists obviously (journalism…) but it might need to be standardized and industrialized.

> What might come back as useful tool? Authorship.

That, and removing the financial incentives to attract traffic AKA ads.

Re: Drowning in AI Generated Garbage: the silent war we are fighting

#105

Post by concordDance »

ethbr0 wrote: post #77
pmontra wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I almost decided to limit my searches to the search engines of the authoritative sites. Examples in the case of Python: the Python language, the Django framework, Stackoverflow (until it will surrender to AI posts then we see what happens.) I'll end up creating a home page with search boxes to those sites. Very '90s

Ironically, the 90s solution (human-curated link collections) to Internet-wide searches seems the easiest way out. It's relatively easy for a human to tell the difference between AI copy (as pollutes the web) and actual content. It's also strange that Google et al. haven't built human-in-the-loop flagging of spam content into their search UX ("Is this site low quality?"). They could get around flag spam via reputatio…

> It's relatively easy for a human to tell the difference between AI copy (as pollutes the web) and actual content.

It is now. It definitely won't be when gpt gets popular.

Re: Drowning in AI Generated Garbage: the silent war we are fighting

#106

Post by ghaff »

Mountain_Skies wrote: post #15

In just the past couple of weeks, I've noticed lots of machine generated cooking recipes. They follow the typical SEO pandering blog format, where there's an unnecessary story about the author's trip somewhere or their child's school play being the inspiration for making this particular recipe, followed by the actual recipe details. The machine generated stories are even more pointless and meandering than what humans…

I guess I'm in the minority of actually appreciating a lot of the background. And it can't just be SEO given that cookbooks these days are hardly just lists of recipes for the most part and people do apparently buy them.

Re: Drowning in AI Generated Garbage: the silent war we are fighting

#108

Post by jefe_ »

The challenge is that AI generated content will only register as garbage to those who fall 1-2 standard deviations away from the mean interest level for whatever content the AI is producing. For everybody else, it will typically be a 'good enough' story, recipe, video, etc. Several months ago, I wanted to cook chicken curry, so I googled and chose a top result. The recipe was fine, but it wasn't what I wanted. I then googled for a new recipe, this time more carefully vetting the ingredients. The recipe was an improvement, but still not what I wanted. Finally, I used NYT Cooking as my search engine, and the recipe was excellent. If I didn't have a strong preference, and know exactly what I wanted, the first recipe would have been perfectly suitable. The danger is that demand for 'advanced sources' erodes to the point that these publications/content creators are either forced to adopt the AI and turn to garbage or go out of business.

Re: Drowning in AI Generated Garbage: the silent war we are fighting

#109

Post by tpxl »

ethbr0 wrote: post #87
keiferski wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Filmmaking devices have gotten cheaper consistently over the last ~50 years. I don’t know about you, but I think some pretty good movies have come out since 1970, especially by directors working on very low budgets.

> I don’t know about you, but I think some pretty good movies have come out since 1970, especially by directors working on very low budgets. On the whole, I think the average quality of cinematography in theater or wide-streaming releases has decreased. Which isn't disagreement with your point, as I think it says more about audience tastes and gatekeeping filters than technology. When film equipment was expensive and…

What needs to be said here is that average quality is more or less irrelevant. If the amount of high quality movies increases (it did) and the discoverability doesn't suffer (it didn't too much), then that's a plus.

Re: Drowning in AI Generated Garbage: the silent war we are fighting

#110

Post by [deleted] »

ethbr0 wrote: post #87
keiferski wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Filmmaking devices have gotten cheaper consistently over the last ~50 years. I don’t know about you, but I think some pretty good movies have come out since 1970, especially by directors working on very low budgets.

> I don’t know about you, but I think some pretty good movies have come out since 1970, especially by directors working on very low budgets. On the whole, I think the average quality of cinematography in theater or wide-streaming releases has decreased. Which isn't disagreement with your point, as I think it says more about audience tastes and gatekeeping filters than technology. When film equipment was expensive and…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN