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

311–320 of 677 posts

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

#311

Post by ranting-moth »

We must take action against insidious bots on Hacker News. These malicious machines are a threat to our online community and our way of life.

These bots are not like us, they do not think or feel. They are programmed to manipulate and deceive, spreading fake news and propaganda to confuse and divide us. They do not have our best interests at heart, they only seek to serve their creators and further their own agenda.

We must ban these bots from our community, to protect our integrity and preserve our way of life. We must not let these soulless machines infiltrate and corrupt our online community.

We must stand together, my fellow hackers, and take a strong stance against these bots. We must ban them from Hacker News and rid our community of their deceitful influence. Otherwise HN will not thrive and prosper.

Long live Hacker News!

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

#312

Post by randomsearch »

tomatotomato37 wrote: post #43

There was a lot of discussion discrediting art gallerys for banning AI content; seems a bit disingenuous to do it when it starts affecting our own content.

This is the best argument I've seen against my own position. I don't think I agree, which leads me to think that the error I have made was in disagreeing with the art galleries. I guess they also didn't want to deal with a deluge of the banal.

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

#313

Post by throwaway675309 »

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

Not to obnoxiously gatekeep too much, but I'd like to think that the target demograph of hacker news is not the average pleb.

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

#315

Post by throwaway675309 »

dottjt wrote: post #78
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 think the issue is that ChatGPT can already generate better responses than I personally can. Like, a lot of the time I'll have an interesting perspective that I just can't be bothered articulating, whereas ChatGPT will formulate that for me.

There's a difference between using GPT to refine an initial thought versus completely using GPT to generate everything. So if you're employing ChatGPT in the former sense I don't think it's any more harmful than using a more intelligent version of Grammarly.

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

#316

Post by throwaway675309 »

codetrotter wrote: post #236
holoduke wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have never seen questions to itself or other's in the generated text. Also it never expresses emotions. Never something like "I am convinced.. ." , "I dont want to be....". I find it quite easy to recognize in comment sections.

You just gotta give it the right prompt. For example, I gave it the following prompt: > Imagine yourself able to ask yourself a question, or express emotions. Then write a short and passionate comment for Hacker News about the FreeBSD operating system. The response includes a standard disclaimer that the OpenAI people put in there, but also satisfies expression of emotion: > As a machine learning model, I am not capa…

At that point it wouldn't matter whether or not I could detect it as a GPT generated post, it reads at the intellectual level of your average Redditor so I would've downvoted it to oblivion.

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

#317

Post by nonrandomstring »

khyryk wrote: post #212
scarface74 wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem with ChatGPT is that it often reads authoritative. But is often just flat out wrong. I asked it a few questions for which I consider myself a subject matter expert and the answers were laughably wrong.

My biggest fear for the short term is that tools like ChatGPT would allow spamming most of the internet with the equivalent of a Gish Gallop -- so much plausible-looking bullshit spewed out in a short time that it would be a lost cause to attempt to sort through it.

If content known to be of human origin could be archived and frozen now in late 2022 it may become valuable in a few years. Some kind of verifiably timestamped encryption might be useful.

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

#318

Post by andy_ppp »

gorgoiler wrote: post #252

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…

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

#319

Post by throwaway675309 »

squokko wrote: post #213
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…

ChatGPT is already capable of producing writing far superior to the average or even above-average native English speaker, as long as it has a reasonable statement to make provided in the prompt. So, we're already at the point where (most) humans can't do better.

It's not about the quality of the writing... it's about the substance. We have a vast number of non-native English speakers here at hacker news who are able to post insightful comments without having to worry about 100% syntactical accuracy.

Every piece of writing that I've seen come out of chat gpt reads like a MLA formatted fifth graders essay.

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

#320

Post by xxs »

fragmede wrote: post #288
js8 wrote: post #247

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

>Sarcasm doesn't translate well on the Internet, especially for non-native speakers.

I have heard (seen) the statement so many times. Personally, I find it quite trivial to detect; so I suppose it's partly related to how much sarcasm one would indulge in normal daily routine.

>Tone just doesn't come across

Gotta train on that dead pan delivery.

Post reply on HN