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

181–190 of 233 posts

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

#181

Post by foxbyte »

chickenpotpie wrote: post #161

This article is complete bunk. The researchers used a "chatgpt detector" which as we've seen over and over in academia, do not work. This study is completely unfounded. God I'm choking on the irony of an article about the dangers of using AI to train AI based on a study that used AI to detect AI

I can understand your frustration with the article, but let's approach it with an open mind. While the use of a "chatgpt detector" may have its limitations, it's essential to appreciate the researchers' effort in exploring new methods. The study may not be perfect, but it contributes to the ongoing conversation about the risks of using AI in AI training. Irony aside, let's keep the discussion going and encourage further research to improve our understanding of this complex field.

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

#182

Post by jprete »

a_cardboard_box wrote: post #108
jahsome wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is funnier than it has any right to be, mostly given the over-abundant "AI will fix everything" narrative currently dominating the hn discourse. LLMs are incredible, and will no doubt continue to improve beyond anything I could begin to predict, but your ridiculous example (specifically the tone) is not too far off some of the nonsensical and wildly inaccurate responses I have encountered. I find rhe unfailing c…

I wonder if it learned that if someone says something dumb, they'll probably keep saying more dumb things. It's trained to predict what comes next, not what is correct. So what comes next after "the sky is yellow"? "The sky is purple", of course!

It learned that if someone on the Internet says X, and someone else says Y, then usually the first person keeps saying X. The first person usually doesn’t admit fault if they discover that they’re wrong, they just go silent.

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

#183

Post by somewhereoutth »

bluetomcat wrote: post #40

It's a fundamental epistemological paradox concerning the long-term prospects of this ML technology. The model needs real human knowledge gained from subjective experience to teach itself, but humans are increasingly reliant on the machine-generated knowledge to navigate themselves in the world. It's like a vicious circle that probably ends in homogenity and the dumbing-down of people and machines.

Indeed - it turns out the singularity was in fact self-referential and the whole thing evaporated in a cloud of weights and biases.

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

#184

Post by AndriyKunitsyn »

foxbyte wrote: post #181
chickenpotpie wrote: post #161

This article is complete bunk. The researchers used a "chatgpt detector" which as we've seen over and over in academia, do not work. This study is completely unfounded. God I'm choking on the irony of an article about the dangers of using AI to train AI based on a study that used AI to detect AI

I can understand your frustration with the article, but let's approach it with an open mind. While the use of a "chatgpt detector" may have its limitations, it's essential to appreciate the researchers' effort in exploring new methods. The study may not be perfect, but it contributes to the ongoing conversation about the risks of using AI in AI training. Irony aside, let's keep the discussion going and encourage furt…

So polite it hurts. I wonder if in the future people on the internet will leave deliberately offensive posts to show that they are human.

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

#186

Post by TeMPOraL »

AndriyKunitsyn wrote: post #184
foxbyte wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can understand your frustration with the article, but let's approach it with an open mind. While the use of a "chatgpt detector" may have its limitations, it's essential to appreciate the researchers' effort in exploring new methods. The study may not be perfect, but it contributes to the ongoing conversation about the risks of using AI in AI training. Irony aside, let's keep the discussion going and encourage furt…

So polite it hurts. I wonder if in the future people on the internet will leave deliberately offensive posts to show that they are human.

It's crazy, isn't it?

I don't know what feels worse for me - that whenever I read a mannered, well-structured and somewhat verbose comment, I now suspect it wasn't authored by a human - or that, as I quickly realized, my own writing style feels eerily similar to ChatGPT output.

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

#187

Post by a123b456c »

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?

Some mturk workers mturk while physically present at another job

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

#188

Post by [deleted] »

bluetomcat wrote: post #40

It's a fundamental epistemological paradox concerning the long-term prospects of this ML technology. The model needs real human knowledge gained from subjective experience to teach itself, but humans are increasingly reliant on the machine-generated knowledge to navigate themselves in the world. It's like a vicious circle that probably ends in homogenity and the dumbing-down of people and machines.

[deleted]

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

#189

Post by woopsn »

bluetomcat wrote: post #40

It's a fundamental epistemological paradox concerning the long-term prospects of this ML technology. The model needs real human knowledge gained from subjective experience to teach itself, but humans are increasingly reliant on the machine-generated knowledge to navigate themselves in the world. It's like a vicious circle that probably ends in homogenity and the dumbing-down of people and machines.

It will merely end in diminishing returns, no?

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

#190

Post by mvdtnz »

foxbyte wrote: post #181
chickenpotpie wrote: post #161

This article is complete bunk. The researchers used a "chatgpt detector" which as we've seen over and over in academia, do not work. This study is completely unfounded. God I'm choking on the irony of an article about the dangers of using AI to train AI based on a study that used AI to detect AI

I can understand your frustration with the article, but let's approach it with an open mind. While the use of a "chatgpt detector" may have its limitations, it's essential to appreciate the researchers' effort in exploring new methods. The study may not be perfect, but it contributes to the ongoing conversation about the risks of using AI in AI training. Irony aside, let's keep the discussion going and encourage furt…

@dang are we ever going to do anything about this? You almost can't read a comment section in a thread about AI without this crap now.
Post reply on HN