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

Don't believe ChatGPT – we do not offer a "phone lookup" service

blog.opencagedata.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

271–280 of 284 posts

Re: Don't believe ChatGPT – we do not offer a "phone lookup" service

#271

Post by shagie »

smt88 wrote: post #268
shagie wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The blog post claims that a human generated video with incorrect information was the source of this. So, why are we blaming GPT for this incorrect information? What's more, the blog post is claiming that GPT was trained on video material (which it wasn't) which is also incorrect information and is apparently convincing enough to cause people to get up in arms about the product of yet another company. The combination…

> So, why are we blaming GPT for this incorrect information? I didn't blame ChatGPT for anything. I just said that it's only function is to generate lies. > Alternatively, would you say that humans posting information that is incorrect and falsely represents the capabilities of another company's product should be similarly covered in laws? Machines shouldn't have the same rights to speech as humans. A single company…

Its function is to transform and classify language. To do this, there is an emergent theory of the world that is contained within the model. People are interpreting the information that can be extracted from it as truth - which isn't its function and it hasn't ever been claimed to be. I would urge you to look at https://platform.openai.com/examples and identify which of those are "generating lies".

My question is "why is a program that is being misused by people held to a higher standard than people posting information on blogs?" Can I hold a person who has a YouTube channel with a video with millions of views to the same standard? Does a presenter on an entertainment media channel with the reach of millions of people get to say untruthful things that are opinion with a free pass?

Scale and purpose matters - yes, indeed it does. We need to make sure that we say what the purpose of GPT is (and it is not to generate lies) and its scale and compare it to other human run endeavors that have similar scale and purpose.

If we say "presenting verifiably incorrect information as true and accessible to more than 10,000 people is against the law" then let's say that. The source of the material isn't at issue - it doesn't matter if that is created by a program or a human, the damage is to the person reading it and there the source doesn't matter what did it.

Re: Don't believe ChatGPT – we do not offer a "phone lookup" service

#272

Post by retconekt »

fy20 wrote: post #239
dTal wrote: post #238

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you saying it's routine for cell phone companies to sell live fine location data to the highest bidder? Can I get a source on that? Horrifying if true, enough to make me switch back to landlines.

Back in 2008 I was working with a company in the UK that had an API to do this with O2. It only provided a rough area of where the user was, as it was based on which (single) cell tower the user was connected to. I'd imagine today MIMO data is good enough to triangulate a very accurate (metres) position.

5G MIMO is sub millimetre 3D accurate to microsecond timing given a good tower time reference.

Re: Don't believe ChatGPT – we do not offer a "phone lookup" service

#273

Post by nl »

supriyo-biswas wrote: post #243
nl wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> does anyone know of ML directions that could add any kind of factual confidence level to ChatGPT and similar? Yes. It's a very active area of research. For example: Discovering Latent Knowledge in Language Models Without Supervision ( https://arxiv.org/abs/2212.03827 ) shows an unsupervised approach for probing a LLM to discover things it thinks are facts Locating and Editing Factual Associations in GPT ( https://a…

Replying to this comment to find it later. (Is there a good way to bookmark comments on HN?)

You can click the date of the comment then "favorite" it.

Re: Don't believe ChatGPT – we do not offer a "phone lookup" service

#274

Post by wlonkly »

msla wrote: post #142
rosywoozlechan wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

there's no "actual phone lookup platform" you can't get a person's location by knowing their phone number, that's a huge privacy violation. You can get the location of your own phone via icloud or google's system for android. You could also install an app on your phone to track your phone's location. You cannot find people based on knowing their phone number, that would be a serious safety issue for you know people t…

Don't tell Whitepages https://www.whitepages.com/reverse-phone > Whitepages free reverse phone lookup service allows you to enter a phone number and quickly find out who called you. Find the phone owner's full name, address, and more. [snip] > Anyone can do a reverse lookup to identify cell phone, residential, and business numbers for free. That, or you could get a normal white pages and process it using some sort of…

The service doesn't seem to work very well at doing what it says, but that's not the important part. The important part is that what ChatGPT is describing is being able look up the current location of a cellphone, not the owner's address.

Re: Don't believe ChatGPT – we do not offer a "phone lookup" service

#275

Post by flangola7 »

massysett wrote: post #246
flangola7 wrote: post #229

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're trying to use a language model as an information reference. A translator can explain what a diplomat is saying but they can't perform their whole job.

? ChatGPT did not simply explain what someone else was saying. It created something completely new and completely false.

Way to miss the point.

Re: Don't believe ChatGPT – we do not offer a "phone lookup" service

#276

Post by weird-eye-issue »

ryankrage77 wrote: post #265
weird-eye-issue wrote: post #223

Related: One reason I just started using Rainforest API is because Github Copilot recommended it. But also last night I tried for 30 minutes to get it to write me some fairly simple HTML parsing code. The tricky part was I couldn't use DOMParser since it was running on Cloudflare Workers and it could never produce any working implementation using HTMLRewriter or regex no matter how many examples I gave it

Are you aware of the pitfalls of parsing HTML with regex?

Yes, but it started to try to use regex so I thought I'd see if it could at least be successful and it wasn't. Despite super simple HTML.

Anyways, I wrote a solution using HTMLRewriter in 10 minutes...

Re: Don't believe ChatGPT – we do not offer a "phone lookup" service

#278

Post by krsdcbl »

dizhn wrote: post #245
VectorLock wrote: post #88

This is the biggest problem I encounter when trying to use ChatGPT on a daily basis for computer programming tasks. It "hallucinates" plausible looking code that never existed or would never work, especially confusing whats in one module or API for something in another. This is where ChatGPT breaks when pushed a bit further than "make customized StackOverflow snippets." For example I asked ChatGPT to show me how to u…

It wrote me a python snippet while my question was about a go library. When prompted it's a go library it wrote similar looking code in go with the same function names that don't actually exist in the library. It's like google search past 2010. It's trying to please everybody too much rather than saying I can't do that. Though when asked to write a new original Koran verse, it does refuse to do that. :)

I guess the issue at core is that it doesn't, and can't know if it can or can't do it. That's not what it's designed to do, even if it does quite well at seeming so.

Re: Don't believe ChatGPT – we do not offer a "phone lookup" service

#279

Post by dang »

singlow wrote: post #71
ceejayoz wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's another apparently evidence-free accusation. Is there some undisclosed bad blood here?

No history at all. Do you have any undisclosed relationship? Hmm. My post was getting traction then suddenly its downvoted to the bottom. Maybe it was a social media management platform. Do you know anyone who runs one of those?

You broke the site guidelines pretty badly in this thread, even stooping to personal attacks. We ban accounts that do that, so please don't do that.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Re: Don't believe ChatGPT – we do not offer a "phone lookup" service

#280

Post by marvy »

fwlr wrote: post #115
singlow wrote: post #27

Its not like ChatGPT made this up. There were pre-existing YouTube tutorials and python scripts available that used OpenCage an purported to do this. OpenCage even blogged about this problem almost a year ago[1]. Honestly it looks more like OpenCage is trying to rehash the same issue for more clicks by spinning it off the hugely popular ChatGPT keywords. Wouldn't be too surprised if they created the original python u…

Devs making baby’s first mobile app add “request location information” permissions, the devices start giving them the phone’s GPS information in the form of lat/lon pairs, and those devs naturally look for a service to make that data useful. What they want is “reverse geolocation”, i.e. take a lat/lon pair and return information that makes sense to a human (country, state, nearby street address, etc). This is a servi…

Thanks for the above. (nice self-restraint in the last paragraph.) Things almost make sense now. Except one problem ... this implies that there are software developers who think to themselves "given a cell phone number, how can I get the phone's location?".

And it further implies that these people don't immediately follow that thought with: "That's surely impossible, since it would be a privacy nightmare if literally everyone in the world could track everyone else in the world's every move".

Or perhaps with this alternative thought, which would lead to the same conclusion: "let's not worry about privacy, how would this even work? Does every phone company in the world pro-actively send every customer's location data to OpenCage, just in case someone queries it? Or does OpenCage wait until it gets a query, and only then query the cell phone company 'just-in-time'? Both of these sound like a lot of work for each phone company to support ... what's the incentive?"

Honestly, I'm a bit surprised that the OpenCage blog post is so calm about this, instead of just yelling incoherently "why WHY why would anyone think like this?!?"

Post reply on HN