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

611–620 of 677 posts

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

#611

Post by wizeman »

jacquesm wrote: post #468
galangalalgol wrote: post #459

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We could work on (1) right? Or as our biological component ceases to be useful to our hybrid self, we can discard it, like a baby tooth. We thought chess or go defined humanity, turns out it is driving.

No thanks, for me. I'll be happy to be just biological and interact with computers through keyboards and screens.

In the future, it might be AI who designs better "hardware"/wetware for humans.

If you don't change your mind (no pun intended) but most of humanity does, it sounds like you'll just be left behind, like very old people who don't even know how to use a fixed-line telephone, never mind a smartphone, computer or the internet. Except, perhaps, in a much more profound/extreme manner.

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

#612

Post by clay-dreidels »

dang wrote: post #485
discreteevent wrote: post #406

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's the only bit of the response that I don't agree with. I don't come to HN solely for utilitarian purposes. If I think I'm frequently communicating with a machine on HN then then I'll stop going to HN. It really will kill HN for me. If I want to communicate with a machine for utilitarian purposes then I'll go directly to the machine and I will know that I'm communicating with a machine (a machine that cannot bring…

Yes, I agree - it was a throwaway line that I didn't think through. Maybe I'll add an edit. Thanks!

I apologize

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

#613

Post by namrog84 »

acqbu wrote: post #333

It's difficult to say for certain whether HN should ban ChatGPT or other generated responses without more information about the specific situation and the potential effects of such a ban. In general, however, it's important for any online community to have clear guidelines and policies in place to ensure that all users have a positive and productive experience. If ChatGPT or other generated responses are causing disr…

Hi chatgpt generated response

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

#614

Post by dang »

ahmedtatum wrote: post #303
joeldo wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On the surface I like this idea, but this makes it harder for participants from poorer countries from, well, participating. For some countries this is more than a week of the average wage!

Quoted post unavailable.

Please don't post like this to HN. It's not what this site is for, and destroys what it is for.

If you wouldn't mind reviewing https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and using HN as intended, we'd be grateful.

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

#615

Post by RestlessMind »

admax88qqq wrote: post #584
jacquesm wrote: post #417

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But that's a ways off. Given the jumps in output quality between '1', '2' and '3' that may not be as far off as I would like it to be. It reminds me of the progression of computer chess. From 'nice toy' to 'beats the worlds best human' since 1949 to 'Man vs Machine World Team Championships' in 2004 is 55 years, but from Sargon (1978) to Deep Blue (1997) is only 21 years. For years we thought there was something uni…

You're looking at it from the perspective of "ChatGPT generating text that looks human." dang is talking about "humans generating text which is 'better' than what ChatGPT can do." Those are very different bars. Average output vs top output. ChatGPT often generates text that a human might plausibly write. But is there text that a human could write that ChatGPT couldn't possibly write?

If ChatGPT is generating text by learning from the best of the human comments, then can an average human comment beat it?

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

#616

Post by RestlessMind »

tambourine_man wrote: post #491
jacquesm wrote: post #417

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But that's a ways off. Given the jumps in output quality between '1', '2' and '3' that may not be as far off as I would like it to be. It reminds me of the progression of computer chess. From 'nice toy' to 'beats the worlds best human' since 1949 to 'Man vs Machine World Team Championships' in 2004 is 55 years, but from Sargon (1978) to Deep Blue (1997) is only 21 years. For years we thought there was something uni…

What I fear the most is that we‘ll keep at this “fake it till you make it” approach and skip the philosophical questions, such as what conscience really is. We’re are probably at the verge of having a bot that reports as conscious and convinces everyone that it is so. We’ll then never know how it got there, if really did or if just pretends so well that it doesn’t matter, etc. If feels like it’s out last chance as a…

> what conscience really is

My favorite line from Westworld - "if you cannot tell the difference, does it really matter?"

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

#617

Post by psychphysic »

simmschi wrote: post #528
danenania wrote: post #437

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's really good at conveying information and summarizing the most prominent points of view on a topic. If your goal is just to get a quick, fact-based overview without any color or fluff, I think it already tops what the vast majority of humans can do. I'm finding myself reaching for it instead of Google or Wikipedia for a lot of random questions, which is pretty damn impressive. It's not good at everything, but I'm…

This. I keep going back to Chat-GPT instead of Google or Wikipedia for exactly the same reasons. It allows you to explore topics that are well understood, in a way that fits your own understanding and pace. It's like somebody writing a great mini-tutorial on topics you're interested in, in a pace and abstraction that suits you. Examples for me are concepts of mathematics or computer science that I would like to fresh…

I've found it way too easy to confuse.

Often I have a specific question like how does X relate to Y. And usually the answer given is total nonsense.

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

#618

Post by eliasdaler »

danenania wrote: post #437
psychphysic wrote: post #345

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree with the under current what chatGPT does well is making a good first draft of a text which is intended to be mostly neutral. It is to communication what calculators are to mathematics.

It's really good at conveying information and summarizing the most prominent points of view on a topic. If your goal is just to get a quick, fact-based overview without any color or fluff, I think it already tops what the vast majority of humans can do. I'm finding myself reaching for it instead of Google or Wikipedia for a lot of random questions, which is pretty damn impressive. It's not good at everything, but I'm…

"quick, fact-based overview"

I'd argue with "fact-based". It frequently makes up facts (and even sources!) as it generates text. Also you should consider the possibility that "the facts" it generates can easily be a part of a tabloid article or a post on some "Moon landing was fake / flat earth" blog.

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

#619

Post by 0xmarcin »

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…

Do you mean difficult to solve captchas? We already have those. Maybe FB social proof of an account will again gain popularity?

[Disclaimer: I am not ChatGPT]

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

#620

Post by eliasdaler »

Method-X wrote: post #592
foepys wrote: post #456

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I hope we will spend more people talking to each other in real life, which actually makes me happy that dead internet is happening. This is certainly true for the majority of people but will be very bad for people who don't fit in with their surroundings. It will hurt communities like LGBTQ+ quite a lot to not be able to talk to other like-minded/open real people.

They will have to find each other offline and come together in healthier ways. The world has changed a lot in the past couple decades. They'll be fine.

What about people with social anxiety? Speech disabilities? People who can't physically go out to an online meet?

It's not just about acceptance, it's also about the comfort and safety of online communication.

Post reply on HN