Live data from Hacker News

ChatGPT Can't Kill Anything Worth Preserving

biblioracle.substack.com

211–220 of 363 posts

Re: ChatGPT Can't Kill Anything Worth Preserving

#211
post #6

I'm by no means a professional writer per se, but I've been paid for work that involves writing. Because of this, a version of ChatGPT that could do my writing for me would be helpful. In my admittedly half-hearted attempts, I've really struggled to recreate anything close to what I wrote.

Clearly, the solution is train a ChatGPT instance that is fine-tuned on generating prompts for ChatGPT.

And thus it begins.

Re: ChatGPT Can't Kill Anything Worth Preserving

#212

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.

TBH, I'm wondering if we need to start using yahoo style curated content directories again. Content aggregators like reddit, hacker news and lobsters already help filter out a lot of noise, but they focus on recent articles. It would be nice to have a searchable/browsable source for interesting content. It wouldn't contain the full internet, but at least it would have better relevancy.

The return of the web ring

Re: ChatGPT Can't Kill Anything Worth Preserving

#213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It fixed some things (“ChatGPT have”, “It’s has”) but changed the meaning of the first sentence and introduced a misplaced modifier (“As a non-native English speaker, ChatGPT…”).

Can you please explain how that is considered a misplaced modifier?

The modified version is saying that ChatGPT is the non-native speaker, not the original poster. It is a different meaning.

It is probably wrong too. ChatGPT is a native English speaker as far as I can tell.

Re: ChatGPT Can't Kill Anything Worth Preserving

#214

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.

Still many people are delighted if you offer them a drawing you made specially for them or if someone handles his guitar and begins to play.

Re: ChatGPT Can't Kill Anything Worth Preserving

#215
I tend to agree in spirit, but I worry there's a real risk of a lemon market[1] situation.

If, for whatever reason, consumers of content are not immediately attuned to the difference between vacuous GPT-nonsense and something that would bring them value if they just thought hard enough, it might lead to an overall reduction of returns to thoughtful, high-quality content, even if that content is only momentarily over the head of the reader, but wouldn't be in the long run.

This obviously to the detriment of both the consumers and producers of content.

[1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Market_for_Lemons

Re: ChatGPT Can't Kill Anything Worth Preserving

#216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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. This one really puzzles me. Voice recognition replaced phone trees. And from what I can tell, it's just worse. In this particular use case I don't think it really replaced tier 1 support. Eithe…

I just keep pressing 0 until a live person answers.

I once heard that in some countries you can just keep repeating "what" and they're legally bound to forward you to a human agent. Something about accessibility laws in case you don't know how to type numbers or can't understand what the voice wants (hearing aids or handicapped people)... Can't find the reference though.

Re: ChatGPT Can't Kill Anything Worth Preserving

#217
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…

In particular, the AI removed the scare quotes around approved. Assuming you intended them, that was a significant loss in nuance.

Re: ChatGPT Can't Kill Anything Worth Preserving

#218
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…

Notably, ChatGPT changed the meaning of what you said.

“Maybe you are trying to do the wrong thing with ChatGPT” vs “Perhaps you are using ChatGPT in the wrong way” are subtly but substantially different statements.

One implies the incorrect usage of the software, the other implies the software being used for the incorrect things.

Re: ChatGPT Can't Kill Anything Worth Preserving

#219
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…

Apropos automated approval of "tone". The company I work for now has a policy that documents must not use any "potentially biased" terms (e.g. "whitelist" or "master"). We now have automated agents that do simple search-and-replace (e.g. s/whitelist/allowlist/) over our internal Wiki pages. With no intention of debating the value or politics of such a policy, I wonder whether anyone is contemplating employing ChatGPT for more pervasive automated tone-control.

Re: ChatGPT Can't Kill Anything Worth Preserving

#220

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 a really bad take.

1. Creativity can be achieved at faster speeds than humans can consume. 2. We have no evidence to say AI and the techniques behind it wont keep improving (there are already so many low hanging fruits, alot of it is infra problems and the other half that we can't even imagine can probably be solved by AI better than humans can)

Post reply on HN