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

ChatGPT Can't Kill Anything Worth Preserving

biblioracle.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 363 posts

Re: ChatGPT Can't Kill Anything Worth Preserving

#121

Post by thanatropism »

_petronius wrote: post #14

I'm less worried about stuff like ChatGPT killing things off, but more about just making everything noticeably a bit worse. To take an analogy: bad voice recognition software abounds everywhere, not because it is better than what it replaced in terms of UX, but because it works just enough and allows massive cost-savings on hiring people to do customer service jobs. A world where most marketing copy is written by med…

This is an old concern (and nevertheless a good one): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Question_Concerning_Techno...

Re: ChatGPT Can't Kill Anything Worth Preserving

#122

Post by alkjsdlkjasd »

bobleeswagger wrote: post #37
_petronius wrote: post #14

I'm less worried about stuff like ChatGPT killing things off, but more about just making everything noticeably a bit worse. To take an analogy: bad voice recognition software abounds everywhere, not because it is better than what it replaced in terms of UX, but because it works just enough and allows massive cost-savings on hiring people to do customer service jobs. A world where most marketing copy is written by med…

> more about just making everything noticeably a bit worse. Hit the nail on the head. ChatGPT will replace the wrong things, and probably create a world where we still need to solve problems ChatGPT has become attached to. It's all noise, I can't perceive a signal at this point.

It's just good at writing, it's contextual understanding is bad (at first).

But give it context and it flies. Ask it to write a cover letter for an engineering role, it will turn out mediocre crap.

Give it the actual role and your CV in the prompts, you're pretty much good to go. It's unique, you still control the narrative (please highlight my ability to work under pressure) and it's done in 10 secs.

I really don't see what isn't to love about that.

Also it usually writes better if you tell to write well.

Re: ChatGPT Can't Kill Anything Worth Preserving

#123

Post by telotortium »

bulgur wrote: post #52
_petronius wrote: post #14

I'm less worried about stuff like ChatGPT killing things off, but more about just making everything noticeably a bit worse. To take an analogy: bad voice recognition software abounds everywhere, not because it is better than what it replaced in terms of UX, but because it works just enough and allows massive cost-savings on hiring people to do customer service jobs. A world where most marketing copy is written by med…

[dead]

I like mchurch, and I think he'll be safe from AI, since the context window needs to increase exponentially in size in order to accommodate an mchurch-style doorstopper.

Re: ChatGPT Can't Kill Anything Worth Preserving

#124

Post by lm28469 »

juve1996 wrote: post #80
alsodumb wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At the rate people are using ChatGPT, there won't really be a search engine to do SEO if ChatGPT and competition keeps getting better. If chatbots become popular, the ad space would go from search engine to product placement in chatbots replies.

All these advances and yet we're still going to ruin them all with ads. What a bright future

That's internet since ~2010, the brightest minds of the world are all busy finding ways to show you ads and/or collect data about you to show you "better" ads.

Re: ChatGPT Can't Kill Anything Worth Preserving

#125

Post by twic »

> it would easily receive the maximum score a 5, particularly given the fact that the AP graders do not pay any attention to whether or not the content of the answer is accurate or true

I'm not familiar with the US education system. Is that last point true, or sarcasm?

Re: ChatGPT Can't Kill Anything Worth Preserving

#126

Post by Gare »

yamtaddle wrote: post #108
tetraodonpuffer wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Trading quality for price has been happening everywhere for long enough that it is easy to see how unfortunately it will now play out in the arts as well. I mean, not that long ago all clothes you wore were custom made by a tailor, all the music you listened to was played live by musicians, all stories were brought to life in front of you by theatre actors: now all of those while still available are significantly mor…

Yep. Recording and photography killed almost all the value (social and financial) of middling artistic talent in music, storytelling, and visual arts, which may well have been what gave a lot of people a significant part of their sense of self-worth before that—plus, maybe, some income. Now AI's coming for most of those who survived that first culling. And not just the middling-talent folks this time.

Most people can't afford top talent to play live music at their wedding or photograph it.

Re: ChatGPT Can't Kill Anything Worth Preserving

#127

Post by whimsicalism »

ergonaught wrote: post #23
elil17 wrote: post #3

Strongly agree. We should have "made the work worth doing" before, but it's even more imperative with LLMs on the scene. However, when will they be able to do work that is worth doing? GPT4? GPT5? There will be a point where we have to grapple with that.

AI/LLMs cannot "do work that is worth doing" in this context because the work that is worth doing involves human learning/education, not simply the production of content. If you meant, "when can AI perform all writing tasks such that it would be a waste of time for human beings to develop the ability to express themselves in writing", well, fine question, likely answered far too soon.

It's already clear that existing LLM have the ability to do things that were previously only accessible to people with "human learning/education."

"Production of content" can probably go a lot further than you think, for a model that has internet/API access.

Would love to see more warrants on the claims you are making - feel like you haven't fleshed it out enough in this comment.

Re: ChatGPT Can't Kill Anything Worth Preserving

#128

Post by lm28469 »

debacle wrote: post #34

I see two big problems with GPT: 1. It presents information really well that is completely false. I don't know exactly how it works under the hood, but sometimes it spits out paragraphs that read like the fever dreams of a flat earther. 2. It will cause our communication skills to further atrophy. Maybe in an innocuous way (no one memorizes epic poems anymore), but with GPT I think it will make people less likely to…

> It will cause our communication skills to further atrophy.

Last week the dude next to me in the train asked chatgpt to generate a "good morning message" for his gf and sent it verbatim to her.

At the same time he was working on what looked like a work related slide presentation, 90% of it was filled with chatgpt answers

Re: ChatGPT Can't Kill Anything Worth Preserving

#129

Post by marginalia_nu »

NotYourLawyer wrote: post #17

It’s gonna kill the internet as a place to find useful information. Google is already almost unusable for researching any topic that’s even adjacent to anything that can be monetized. Widespread, good-enough, AI-generated, SEO’d “articles” will push it over the edge.

Dunno, may just be the opposite that happens in the long term. The cheaper it becomes to produce content spam the further the traffic becomes diluted and the smaller each individual spammers' profit margins become. The very same discovery issues that plague human-created content is also in the end harmful to spam content.

Google is overall a pretty bad benchmark IMO. There's a lot of quality content that they seem to struggle to find. Not that it doesn't exist, you just won't find it for a host of complex reasons.

Re: ChatGPT Can't Kill Anything Worth Preserving

#130

Post by gmd63 »

garblegarble wrote: post #73
101008 wrote: post #22

I agree with the article but maybe you are trying to do the wrong thing with ChatGPT. I am not a native English speaker (as many of you already noticed due to my grammar mistakes), so ChatGPT have been very useful to rewrite my texts, fix grammar and maybe "beautify" them a bit. It's has been an invaluable tool in that sense. I feel much more confident now sending emails and writing important messages knowing that th…

As a native English speaker, I'd be quite wary of doing that -- I thought your original message was perfectly clear (a few errors like "It's has been", but nothing that impeded my ability to understand -- in fact, I had to closely re-read your 1st message to see the difference, because my brain skipped over things like "it's has been"). The "ChatGPT improved" result is certainly a little more polished, but given Chat…

I helped a guy who wasn't good at english send emails in a previous job. It was conflicting, because with automation we're removing trials from our lives that convey how much mastery we have in given areas.

One of the heaviest consequences of AI proliferation is that the value of understanding will continue to plummet, while the value of asking for help and delegating will rise.

This is all fine as long as there are plenty of willing subordinates, man or machine, to do the dirty work of actually knowing things for you, but what happens when they wise up to the fact that they're getting the short end of the stick?

Post reply on HN