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

As an AI Language Model

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 99 posts

Re: As an AI Language Model

#81

Post by rchaud »

gpderetta wrote: post #22
frozenwind wrote: post #9

For now, this is just funny, I laughed. But with the advent of all these new open-source LLMs, it will get worse. If you thought people were gullible for falling for fake comments from bots, just wait for the near future. Post-factual/Post-Truth era truly begins. The internet that used to be a source of information is no more, only islands of truth will remain (like, hopefully, Wikipedia, but even that is questionabl…

The thing is, the internet is already a cesspool of meaningless, misleading and outright malicious information. I guess the earlier we all collectively realize it the best it is.

> The thing is, the internet is already a cesspool of meaningless, misleading and outright malicious information.

Let me just throw this trash overboard. What's the harm? It's not going to make the pacific garbage patch any bigger!

Re: As an AI Language Model

#82

Post by rchaud »

Mashimo wrote: post #18
oe wrote: post #16

A danish electronics store tried to generate translations using GPT: https://www.proshop.fi/?s=as+an+ai+model "Sorry, as an AI language model, I cannot translate random letter and number combinations like "HD29HLVx" into Finnish or any other language."

Haha, that is hilarious. I wonder why they did not just use deepl or similar that is made for exactly this. Anyhow, I will let them know.

Because an AI hustlebro on Twitter told them ChatGPT will solve everything.

Re: As an AI Language Model

#83

Post by rchaud »

AnimalMuppet wrote: post #57
yobbo wrote: post #17

Prose used to function as proof-of-work for humans everywhere - marketing, academia, and so on. Credibility was assigned based on the quality (and quantity) of the language instead of the content. I see mostly positive effects of this ending.

But GPT-generated prose still reads a bit "flat" to me. There's no "sizzle". There's no surprising words. In terms of Shannon information theory, there's not enough information there - not enough entropy.

A real Amazon review would have rated it 5 stars because it arrived on time.

Re: As an AI Language Model

#84

Post by rchaud »

usrbinbash wrote: post #20
BulgarianIdiot wrote: post #3

And now we truly know why GPT insists to say "as an AI model" when we break a rule. It's precisely this. Like a signature, so we find it out in the wild when it's abused.

Except this only works when people are using ChatGPT (the web app). The API doesn't do that.

Most bucket shop spammers aren't going to shell out for the API version.

Re: As an AI Language Model

#85

Post by rchaud »

jojobas wrote: post #29

This is just the beginning. The bullshit avalanche is upon us.

I hope your definition includes the swathes of techno-optimists that bandwagon on to new tech and relentlessly shill its positives with religious fervor.

Re: As an AI Language Model

#86

Post by Uehreka »

wetpaws wrote: post #77
Uehreka wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The internet is currently quite useful, it could stand to be a lot less so. Don’t let your cynicism blind you to the fact that we do have a lot to lose.

I don't see how those points are mutually exclusive tbh. Yes, internet is quite usefull. Yes, it is also a cesspool, absolutely.

I’m taking issue with the characterization that we have nothing to lose, which seems to be the implication of GP and the comments agreeing with them.

Re: As an AI Language Model

#87

Post by mensetmanusman »

grumbel wrote: post #26
frozenwind wrote: post #9

For now, this is just funny, I laughed. But with the advent of all these new open-source LLMs, it will get worse. If you thought people were gullible for falling for fake comments from bots, just wait for the near future. Post-factual/Post-Truth era truly begins. The internet that used to be a source of information is no more, only islands of truth will remain (like, hopefully, Wikipedia, but even that is questionabl…

I am more optimistic here. While LLMs allow you to produce tons of garbage, they also provide the tools to filter through that garbage, something we didn't have before. LLMs allow us to view content in a way that we decided, not the content creator. That's extremely powerful and lets us sidesteps a lot of the old methods used to manipulate us. The risk is more in the LLMs themselves, as whoever gets to control them g…

LLMs don’t know what garbage is or is not, depends on what they are trained on.

Re: As an AI Language Model

#89

Post by mensetmanusman »

grumbel wrote: post #46
levesque wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Predicting whether a text was written by a LLM or not is not trivial. What was the latest number by OpenAI? 30%? As LLMs get better, it seems like we won't be able to distinguish real text from fake text. Your LLM will be able to summarize it, but it will still be 99% spam.

You don't need to predict if it what written by LLM, if it's a human or machine makes no difference to the validity of a text. You just need to be able to extract the actual information out of it and cross check it against other sources. The summary that an LLM can provide is not just of one text, but of all the texts about the topic it has access to. Thus you never need to access the actual texts itself, just whatev…

If LLMs start writing a majority of HN comments, we won’t know what is true or not. HN will be noise and worthless then.

Re: As an AI Language Model

#90

Post by satisfice »

levesque wrote: post #45
grumbel wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am more optimistic here. While LLMs allow you to produce tons of garbage, they also provide the tools to filter through that garbage, something we didn't have before. LLMs allow us to view content in a way that we decided, not the content creator. That's extremely powerful and lets us sidesteps a lot of the old methods used to manipulate us. The risk is more in the LLMs themselves, as whoever gets to control them g…

Predicting whether a text was written by a LLM or not is not trivial. What was the latest number by OpenAI? 30%? As LLMs get better, it seems like we won't be able to distinguish real text from fake text. Your LLM will be able to summarize it, but it will still be 99% spam.

Banal is banal, whether written by a human or not.

But GPT text is inherently deceptive, even when factually flawless— because we humans never evaluate a message merely on its factuality. We read between the lines. The same way insects are confused and fly in spirals around light, we will be flying spirals around GPT text based on our assumptions about its nature or the nature of the human whom we presume to have written it.

Post reply on HN