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

ChatGPT and the AI Apocalypse

new.pythonforengineers.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 104 posts

Re: ChatGPT and the AI Apocalypse

#91

Post by benlivengood »

ben_w wrote: post #31
ccday wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This technology will kill all digital information exchange. This is a bit hyperbolic. We have strong encryption like PGP for media like email (although I suppose getting people to use it is the issue), and there will be plenty of incentive to develop other tech to counter the problems you mentioned.

PGP tells you you're talking to an entity which could set up PGP, it doesn't help you determine if the account ben_w is merely one of many government sock puppet accounts trying to push a specific meme into the minds of the general population. Knowing who to trust… was already hard-to-impossible with just normal social media; cheap LLMs will definitely make this harder, as more groups will be able to afford what was…

The web of trust that was intended to be built by PGP is what would solve the "are you a real person" problem. We're connected to everyone else on earth by 3 or 4 degrees; it's unlikely that every path along that graph to another human is going to be adversarial such that a non-human can get added to the web of trust.

PGP's web of trust never worked because it was always too small to cover enough humans and take advantage of the low degree of overall connectivity.

Re: ChatGPT and the AI Apocalypse

#92

Post by shagie »

sylware wrote: post #90
shagie wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sign up for an account, go to https://platform.openai.com/account/api-keys and create an API key. The raw curl (or python, or node.js - or other those are just the samples) are browserless.

"You need to enable JavaScript to run this app.", I am using links2. Any "anonymous", public and severely rate limited keys?

You could spin up a VM that has a browser in it and use that to create the account and destroy the VM afterwards. You could use selenium with headless chrome.

If you have a smart phone running any browser there, you could use that.

There are some auth checks to make sure that a single person isn't signing up multiple accounts to get the free credits and if that sort of thing is a deterrent to you using it you may find it difficult to use.

Re: ChatGPT and the AI Apocalypse

#94

Post by rrrrrrrrrrrryan »

mediaman wrote: post #83
impalallama wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Theres a term for this kinda of "supply and demand" profiteering and its called price gouging and its explicitly illegal in many states so in times of emergency so you aren't suddenly getting absurd %1000 percent up charges buying basic necessities before a hurricane. https://www.ncsl.org/financial-services/price-gouging-state-... .

There's an alternative view on what some call "price gouging." The idea is that the market is providing a strong incentive for you to figure out how to get bottled water to the disaster zone. This is wildly unpopular: people view it as capitalists profiteering off a disaster. And it's true, they are. In response, people demand prohibition of price gouging. But the result is a lack of product availability. For example…

In a non-psychopathic society, a bunch of benevolent counterforces kick in during a tragedy. People who have extra water share it with those who need it, and people who have extra seats in their car let others in with them.

There will always be those who view all scenarios where demand vastly outstrips supply as an opportunity to be exploited for money, no matter how tragic the situation.

I personally can't imagine charging people money to get in the car with me if they're trying to escape a gunman, and I like to think most people are the same. These laws are based on that assumption (regardless of whether or not it holds true in practice).

Re: ChatGPT and the AI Apocalypse

#95

Post by 13years »

smt88 wrote: post #79
13years wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is exceedingly disturbing. I have no answers. The potential solutions will probably be even more disturbing. I can imagine there will be proposals for everyone having some cryptographic ID to use the internet so all data creation can be tracked to an individual. The end of privacy and freedom.

> cryptographic ID Verifiable digital IDs can only confirm that you're the holder of a key. The best case scenario is that it proves you are the same person as before , but there's no way to prove that you are who you say you are .

Yes, not saying it is a real solution. Just that solutions will be proposed that will only be mostly onerous.

Re: ChatGPT and the AI Apocalypse

#96

Post by sylware »

shagie wrote: post #92
sylware wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"You need to enable JavaScript to run this app.", I am using links2. Any "anonymous", public and severely rate limited keys?

You could spin up a VM that has a browser in it and use that to create the account and destroy the VM afterwards. You could use selenium with headless chrome. If you have a smart phone running any browser there, you could use that. There are some auth checks to make sure that a single person isn't signing up multiple accounts to get the free credits and if that sort of thing is a deterrent to you using it you may fin…

Not "difficult" : impossible.

Well, I'll wait for those anonymous/public rate limited keys or a noscript/basic (x)html registering process, or www sites which will propose basic (x)html form based prompts.

Re: ChatGPT and the AI Apocalypse

#97

Post by mguerville »

lumost wrote: post #86
mguerville wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And I believe there's an entire subgroup of Uber drivers that monitors the current rates and opts to drive only when there's a good enough surge, thereby dynamically creating more supply.

Supply is much less elastic than that. For a short randomized surge of 2 hours, how many new drivers are going to actually come into the road? How many of the rides will complete at that price? How long will the surge last? No one is dropping what they are doing and commuting an hour for a 2 hour surge. Odds are the surge won’t be present when the drivers arrive.

I only have anecdotes and it’s from Chicago (not SF where indeed a lot of drivers commute an hour to get to a high demand area) but here it’s not that uncommon for people to be able to quickly hop on or off driving on short notice. It probably rarely moves the supply needle more than 10-15% at most but that’s not completely insignificant in comparing vs a less dynamic fleet like taxis.

Re: ChatGPT and the AI Apocalypse

#98

Post by a_cardboard_box »

bakuninsbart wrote: post #87
a_cardboard_box wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If our consciousness is merely observing the universe, why do our physical mouths talk about the consciousness we experience? It sure seems like our consciousness is affecting the material world.

That's not really what the idea of determinism excluding free will is about: Let's assume for a second that the Big Bang is the singular starting point of the universe. The Big Bang causes the first things to exist or move. Everything else exists in a cause-effect-relationship with this first move, and we could imagine the whole history of the universe as a directed graph of causes and effects, with Earth, living bei…

Can we agree that consciousness is outside the realm of mathematics? That, while there could be a formula that determines what our conscious experiences should be, the fact that we actually experience them, as opposed to them just existing in some abstract sense, is not mathematical?

So if the behaviour of our universe can be described entirely mathematically, isn't it weird that it physically contains this comment about how we know that we're in a universe that contains non-mathematical stuff? It's of course possible. But I find it strange.

> If it isn't the case it might well mean there are things that aren't caused by anything, which would be really weird as well.

Isn't this necessarily the case for anything to exist? Is it more strange for there to be exactly one thing without a cause (the initial conditions of the universe), or for things without causes to just be a regular part of the universe we live in?

Re: ChatGPT and the AI Apocalypse

#99

Post by smt88 »

AnIdiotOnTheNet wrote: post #84
smt88 wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So you don't want to be able to call your relatives with certainty? You don't want to read what's going on that isn't right in front of your face? Even local news would become unreliable.

What makes you so sure it is reliable now? Or in the past for that matter? The same dynamics of trust existed before as exist now, it's just that we have a lot more sources than we used to.

> What makes you so sure it is reliable now?

The technology to fake it isn't in widespread use.

> Or in the past for that matter?

The technology to fake it didn't exist.

> The same dynamics of trust existed before as exist now

No they didn't.

Re: ChatGPT and the AI Apocalypse

#100

Post by ajani »

wankle wrote: post #82
ajani wrote: post #52

We will get better at using ML systems. I find myself regenerating chatGPT's responses just to see if it generates similar responses. I ask it questions phrased differently to see if it is consistent. Discussing what code needs to do before asking it to implement it. And I get tremendous use out of it. Electricity must've been scary when it was invented (harnessed?).

Electricity is a form of energy made by nature, AI is made by humans, who also invented nuclear weapons.

Electricity is a natural phenomenon, yes, in the clouds, maybe elsewhere. But using giant turbines to generate electricity by manipulating the electromagnetic field mechanically, thus harnessing electricity to flow into wires and into our homes required a lot of invention.

We also invented a method to refine electricity into nanometer sized channels and sinks that enable bits that enable computing.

Nuclear fission is also a natural phenomenon. And we invented bad things with it. But also some power plants. Meltdowns aside.

Inventions aren’t good or bad. People are. If all soldiers choose to lay down arms the weapons lose their badness.

I don’t see ML systems as they currently are, to be nuclear bombs i.e. the end. But rather akin to the nascent forms of harnessing electricity with basic inventions and their basic functions.

Invention of electricity contributed necessarily to the creation of computing. And ml systems will contribute to many developments. Time will tell.

The coming apocalypse has always been us, not the things we create.

Post reply on HN