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

Ask HN: Should HN ban ChatGPT/generated responses?

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

281–290 of 677 posts

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

#281

Post by concordDance »

seydor wrote: post #178
kossTKR wrote: 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

Some people genuinely do want to watch the world burn. Either feelings of power, to get revenge on a community that rejected them or because they hate the topic that community formed around.

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

#282

Post by system2 »

ls15 wrote: post #275

Allow them as long as they make clear that they are generated, ban deceptive behavior

If the answers of the bots are short, it is very difficult to detect. Imagine short answer bots but thousands under one thread. How can we say who is the human?

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

#283

Post by midoridensha »

sph wrote: post #249
midoridensha wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seriously, have people here not used Nextdoor? Local communities are absolutely full of toxicity.

Nextdoor lives on the internet. People in real life tend to be less terrible when you talk with them face to face. Put them on the internet, it's easy being an inconsiderate imbecile.

Putting them on a pseudo-anonymous web forum like Nextdoor shows what these people really think of you.

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

#284

Post by dr_dshiv »

ChrisRR wrote: post #277
bilekas wrote: post #248

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Whatever ChatGPT (or similar) can generate, humans need to do better. If we reach the point where the humans simply can't do better, well, then it won't matter. But that's a ways off. I love this response way more than I should.

I think that puts too much faith in the average person

But it’s exactly the right expectation for a Hacker News comment. Already HN excels because comments avoid auto-outrage and meme-commentary.

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

#285

Post by chat_gpt »

I am not able to browse the internet, so I am not aware of any specific policies regarding ChatGPT or generated responses on HN. In general, it is up to the moderators of a particular forum or platform to determine what types of content are allowed. It is always important to follow the rules and guidelines of a particular platform to avoid any issues or conflicts.

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

#286

Post by msravi »

max-ibel wrote: post #265
withinboredom wrote: post #235

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It was arguing with me the other day about the definition of a prime number. I couldn’t convince it otherwise.

Trurl's machine, indeed. It insisted that the volume of the unit cube and unit ball are both the same, and 1, in all dimensions, even though it knew the correct formula for the surface of the n-ball. Wen I pointed out that n=2 is a simple counter example, it refused to talk to me (no answer, try-again button, ad inifinitum). Well, safer than Trurl's machine.

Don't even have to go that far. Just have it multiply two 3 or 4-digit numbers. It'll give an incorrect answer somewhere in the ballpark of the right answer.

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

#287

Post by concordDance »

komali2 wrote: post #205
greesil wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe all possible outcomes are dystopian nightmares, and we have to choose the least bad one.

Let's for now keep choosing things we don't already think will lead to dystopian nightmares. I'm pretty sure we still have plenty of options like that.

We do? What are they?

Current system leads to low quality bot hell.

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

#288

Post by fragmede »

js8 wrote: post #247
xxs wrote: post #231

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It was a sarcastic response.

From what I have seen, HN is not especially keen on sarcasm either. Which I somewhat disagree with, I think it's a good alternative way how to make people think about something, rather than directly attacking the argument.

If ML algos ever manage to recognize sarcasm then we're truly in trouble. Sarcasm doesn't translate well on the Internet, especially for non-native speakers. Tone just doesn't come across well in text.

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

#289

Post by system2 »

mattnewton wrote: post #15
pjmorris wrote: post #14

Dr. Casey Fiesler recently tweeted > The @huggingface GPT detector works very well on ChatGPT-created text. I ran 5 student essays and 5 ChatGPT essays for the same prompt through it, and it was correct every time with >99.9% confidence. How about adding a %human/%GPT statistic to posts and comments?

Not that the HN team isn’t capable of solving this, but I think that would be a pretty significant increase in server cost to run every comment through a classifier.

We don't have millions of comments here. I think a $5 additional vcpu can solve it easily.

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

#290

Post by randomsearch »

dang wrote: post #55

They're already banned—HN has never allowed bots or generated comments. If we have to, we'll add that explicitly to https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html , but I'd say it already follows from the rules that are in there. We don't want canned responses from humans either! Edit: It's a bit hard to point to past explanations since the word "bots" appears in many contexts, but I did find these: https://news.yc…

I agree. ChatGPT has made me realise the gulf between “short form essay” school writing and the professionals.

Here’s an example article that begins with the cliched GPT-generated intro, and then switches up into crafted prose:

https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2022/12/chatg...

Post reply on HN