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

671–677 of 677 posts

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

#671

Post by randomsearch »

psychphysic wrote: post #670
randomsearch wrote: post #669

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Previous poster said that GPT is to writing what calculators are to math. That's an interesting point, is this an analogy we can reason with? My terse response was "no, because calculators are correct all the time whereas GPT is incorrect a lot of time". So, that reasoning can't be used. Need a different one. So we conclude, no that's not a good analogy.

So you're ignoring proof that calculators aren't correct all the time(infact given most numbers are irrational calculators are always mostly wrong and imprecise). And stating your incorrect view as fact. That's what you mean by curious debate? Bizarre! P.s. this is why it's a good analogy you've learnt something about calculators from thinking about the analogy as well as chatGPT

The existence of irrational numbers is in no way analogous to saying “the king of England is George V” and to pretend otherwise is disingenuous.

My general approach to discussion is to assume the most generous interpretation of a post.

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

#672

Post by psychphysic »

randomsearch wrote: post #671
psychphysic wrote: post #670

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So you're ignoring proof that calculators aren't correct all the time(infact given most numbers are irrational calculators are always mostly wrong and imprecise). And stating your incorrect view as fact. That's what you mean by curious debate? Bizarre! P.s. this is why it's a good analogy you've learnt something about calculators from thinking about the analogy as well as chatGPT

The existence of irrational numbers is in no way analogous to saying “the king of England is George V” and to pretend otherwise is disingenuous. My general approach to discussion is to assume the most generous interpretation of a post.

Just seems like you're ignoring that calculators are only very rarely correct.

But you do you.

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

#673

Post by sheepscreek »

jerf wrote: post #542
sheepscreek wrote: post #487

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A true AI will not have one opinion. It will realize there are many truths - one persons truth is really a perspective based on their inputs which are different than another's. Change the inputs and you’ll often get a different output. ChatGPT further proves this notion - you can ask it to prove/disprove the same point and it will do so quite convincingly both times.

Do not mistake ChatGPT for AI in general. ChatGPT, GPT, and transformers in general are not the end state of AI. They are one particular manifestation and projecting forward from them is drawing a complex hypershape through a single point (even worse than drawing a line through a single point). It is probably more humanly-accurate to say that ChatGPT has no opinions at all. It has no understanding of truth, it has no…

We give ourselves (humans) too much credit. How does a child learn? By copying observing, copying and practice (learning from mistakes). ChatGPT differs only in that it has learned from the experience of millions of others over a period of 100s of years. Suffice to say, it can never behave like a single human being since it has lived through the experience of so many.

How does one articulate “conscience” or “intelligence” or an opinion? I think these are all a product of circumstances/luck/environment/slight genetic differences (better cognition, or hearing or sight, or some other sense brain, genes could define different abilities to model knowledge - such as backtracking etc).

So to get a “true” human like opinionated personality, we’ll need to restrict its learnings to that of one human. Better yet, give it the tools to learn on its own and let it free inside a sandbox of knowledge.

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

#674

Post by max-ibel »

jacquesm wrote: post #426
msravi wrote: post #286

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

You're asking a language model to do math. What's impressive there is not that it fails but that it comes up with an answer at all, especially if it is in the ballpark. Most humans would do exactly the same unless given either access to pen and paper or a calculator, and it would likely be trivial for GPT-3 input processing to detect it has been presented with a math question and to farm it out to a special calculati…

Well, everything is math, at some level. Supreme Court decisions might be. There are software packages used to day, using some "AI", to help judges determine the adequate level of punishments looking at circumstantial factors determining recividism rates et cetera [1] [2].

I believe that in the not too distant future there will be pressure to use these "magic" AIs to be applied everywhere, and this pressure will probably not look very hard at whether the AI is good at math or not. Just look at all the pseudoscience in the criminal system [3]. I believe this poses a real problem, so keeping hareping on this is probably the right response.

[1] https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/01/us/politics/sent-to-priso... [2] https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2018/11/algorithms-court-crim...

[3] https://www.bostonreview.net/articles/nathan-robinson-forens...

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

#675

Post by randomsearch »

jfoster wrote: post #654
randomsearch wrote: post #630

Earlier quoted context omitted.

mmm well how long did GPT take? Say a quarter of that time?

OpenAI started late 2015. I don't know when they started working on GPT, but GPT-2 was early 2019. Nearly 4 years later, still no GPT-2 detector?

Following up - according to the FT today, Turnitin (widely used academic anti-plagiarism tool) are developing a detector.

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

#676

Post by ShamelessC »

robbomacrae wrote: post #631
ShamelessC wrote: post #342

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Grandparent is a typical HN comment. "Oh, I just learned about a subject? It's so easy! Of course none of the studied experts considered [my dumb thought experiment i just came up with]. Quality of the comments is getting subpar here - and it's _not_ GPT. There's been a similar downward trend for a while.

(FYI I haven't just learned about the subject.. I used to work at Reddit and have been involved in AI projects for a decade.) In trying to understand how I triggered such a comment I read a few of your posts. I'm sorry for what you are dealing with and I'm all too familiar with it as it runs in my family. Just please do consider that there are people behind these comments... at least for now there are... 90% of the t…

Thanks for the thoughtful comment. Sorry for being dismissive and reactionary. Happy holidays!

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

#677

Post by [deleted] »

CyberDildonics wrote: post #604
jacquesm wrote: post #512

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, for starters we could take your comment and compare it to GPT-3 output to see which one makes more sense.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33851993 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33952506 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33651960

[deleted]
Post reply on HN