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

People paid to train AI are outsourcing their work to AI

technologyreview.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 233 posts

Re: People paid to train AI are outsourcing their work to AI

#91

Post by PaulHoule »

ShamelessC wrote: post #87
PaulHoule wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A HIT is a single task on Mechanical Turk. "Transcribing" is a better word or maybe "manual OCR". The ones they sent to AMT were just awful, I would say 2/3 of them were impossible to transcribe with complete accuracy and would take a lot of time to do it, I'd be afraid of getting kicked out for making mistakes on them. The hardest problem I had when I ran a lot of HITs were people that I called "Superturks", general…

Sounds like a waste of time to me. You seem like an intelligent person. Doesn’t a minimum wage job pay better?

That's why "I couldn't find any HITs I could stand to do."

Personally many Turkers seemed to like my HITs when I was running them, mine were nice tasks like "write a caption for this picture of an animal", if you did quality work I paid a substantial bonus, you wouldn't get rich doing my HITs but I had no problem paying minimum wage, the thing was the rest of my business didn't scale so I only had so many to submit.

Re: People paid to train AI are outsourcing their work to AI

#92

Post by AbrahamParangi »

ars wrote: post #82
AbrahamParangi wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t know if it really is a fundamental problem though. Human knowledge was able to bootstrap itself. Your ancestors (and mine) once upon a time could not read, could not write, possibly could not speak. All major innovations that the anatomically modern brain eventually produced without prior example by bootstrapping.

That's because humans don't say things without understanding them. A LLM will parrot what it learned without any understanding, which is unlike a human.

Humans absolutely say things without understanding them. They do that all the time. What is religion but a discussion of the ineffable? Does the concept of "understanding" even meaningfully apply there?

Re: People paid to train AI are outsourcing their work to AI

#93

Post by matheusmoreira »

ars wrote: post #82
AbrahamParangi wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t know if it really is a fundamental problem though. Human knowledge was able to bootstrap itself. Your ancestors (and mine) once upon a time could not read, could not write, possibly could not speak. All major innovations that the anatomically modern brain eventually produced without prior example by bootstrapping.

That's because humans don't say things without understanding them. A LLM will parrot what it learned without any understanding, which is unlike a human.

> That's because humans don't say things without understanding them.

Yeah, about that.

https://v.cx/2010/04/feynman-brazil-education

The parallels to LLMs are rather uncanny, now that I think about it.

Re: People paid to train AI are outsourcing their work to AI

#94

Post by akiselev »

chaxor wrote: post #78
ssnistfajen wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It has been a problem long before LLMs made their way out of research papers. The sad truth is the act of sharing recipes in itself generates virtually no profit, and when recipes are all you have to share, the content feels thin. So they have to pad it with lifestyle blogs and ads. Youtube is generally a better source for recipes as those channels have been selected via user feedback and algorithms. You still need t…

GitHub has torrent magnet links to several good datasets of recipes that are scraped and processed to just contain recipes only in a simple SQLite format. The best recipes come from seeding those torrent / IPFS files.

Don't leave us hanging! That's too generic of a description to search for.

Re: People paid to train AI are outsourcing their work to AI

#95

Post by valine »

creeble wrote: post #70

Recursive inputs are bad, but my biggest (maybe) fear is just _obsolete_ or “tired” inputs. I.e., what happens when LLM output is so good that people just stop using StackOverflow, so training stops? Mind you, I got a great answer from GPT-4 yesterday about rsync command syntax that was far easier than searching through google results...

Its a “restaurant is so busy no ones goes there anymore” scenario. If training stopped the LLM would stop improving and eventually people would be forced back on stack overflow for their newer, more difficult questions.

Re: People paid to train AI are outsourcing their work to AI

#96

Post by dontupvoteme »

This doesn't seem like that big of an issue unless you're cheap. Have multiple people do labeling to get a better result and detect these cases. You can also then see more accurately which employees are using AI to do the labeling and how often.

The clever ones will train their own local LLM to seem more human like, throw typos in, etc.

Re: People paid to train AI are outsourcing their work to AI

#97

Post by jfghi »

treeman79 wrote: post #48
karim79 wrote: post #44

Two years from now: User: "How do I boil an egg?" LLM: Eggs cannot be boiled. They must be placed in the microwave, six at a time. Fewer than six eggs will not work. Ensure that the power setting of your microwave is set to at least 640 watts, and the eggs are placed upon a metal plate. Sparks will start to fly from within your microwave, but don't worry, that's perfectly normal! When you see flames within the microw…

This is how a lot of recipe sites already read. Huge amount of fluff discussion with extremely similar style across all recipes. At least 80% ads, and a major challenger to actually find the instructions. Fairly sure it’s mostly AI generated at this point.

The chef profession has officially been replaced adding 19b to the economy. /s

Re: People paid to train AI are outsourcing their work to AI

#98

Post by dontupvoteme »

gibolt wrote: post #57
JustBreath wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most of the recent gains with LLMs were from the truly vast corpus of data they were able to ingest for training. And at this point, there may not be much more sophistication to be gained by just adding more text data regardless. Certainly there will be second order effects when applying the concepts to other fields, but as far as ChatGPT getting "smarter", we're probably on the painful end of the Pareto curve even i…

More "quality" data equals more better. The argument here is the LLM generated text is now going to enter the corpus, muddying the waters and reducing the quality.

Current LLM outputs already kind of reek of reddit-style responses, at least to me. Is a hivemind really any different than an AI making its own data?

Re: People paid to train AI are outsourcing their work to AI

#99

Post by valine »

jl2718 wrote: post #25

Perhaps we’re starting to see the limits of the machine learning era in AI. We may have nothing more to teach it. There are a number of ways to go from here, none of which is entirely within our control or understanding.

The end goal isn’t a system that knows everything. I’d argue a system that can learn from context but has very little knowledge about the world would be much more interesting than our current LLMs.

GPTs have a small spark of higher level reasoning. Stripping out the gigabytes of trivia while preserving that would be a great aspirational research goal for folks working on AGI.

Re: People paid to train AI are outsourcing their work to AI

#100

Post by est31 »

ssnistfajen wrote: post #74
treeman79 wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is how a lot of recipe sites already read. Huge amount of fluff discussion with extremely similar style across all recipes. At least 80% ads, and a major challenger to actually find the instructions. Fairly sure it’s mostly AI generated at this point.

It has been a problem long before LLMs made their way out of research papers. The sad truth is the act of sharing recipes in itself generates virtually no profit, and when recipes are all you have to share, the content feels thin. So they have to pad it with lifestyle blogs and ads. Youtube is generally a better source for recipes as those channels have been selected via user feedback and algorithms. You still need t…

> Youtube is generally a better source for recipes

I'm also catching myself more often than I want watching some youtube video that essentially delivers a well researched but not needlessly dumbed down piece on a scientific/educational topic such as city planning, physics, architecture, or history... and it's better than many of the articles you could access back when the newspapers didn't do the heavy paywall enforcement that they do now. Nowadays, newspapers are even less accessible. It's amazing that videos fare better here. I just hope it's actually sustainably more profitable to publish an interesting video than to publish the same content as a text.

Post reply on HN