Are large language models a threat to digital public goods? • Hacker News Board

Re: Are large language models a threat to digital public goods?

#161

Post by wilg » Thu, Jul 20, 2023, 7:26 PM UTC

sensanaty wrote: post #160

wilg wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh, I know, it's phenomenal. Can't wait for it to be a little smarter and more directly integrated into docs/search.

You mean like this very helpful instance where it just makes shit up that directly contradicts the docs that are on the exact page it's on? https://github.com/mdn/yari/issues/9208

No, obviously I do not. However, I am capable of nuance and can find a tool useful even if it has flaws.

Re: Are large language models a threat to digital public goods?

#162

Post by FeepingCreature » Fri, Jul 21, 2023, 5:20 AM UTC

spacebanana7 wrote: post #98

FeepingCreature wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Would be cool to have projects write documentation in a form that's annotated for LLMs, ie. premarked topic breaks.

I think open source might benefit a lot from being so easy for LLMs to provide answers for. Hopefully they’ll be able to reason straight from the source code.

I've had GPT3 give me the wrong answers to questions. Then I google the topic, find the documentation and go "hm, yeah, I can see how it would think that." For instance, ask it what `set +o` does in Bash, then check the online docs.

Re: Are large language models a threat to digital public goods?

#163

Post by 2muchcoffeeman » Tue, Jul 25, 2023, 5:04 AM UTC

hdior wrote: post #134

2muchcoffeeman wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can only say this right now where there are an abundance of ideas and less skill to implement them. But even implementation requires creative thinking and the ability to generate ideas. Now we want to take away the need for the first part. This is NOT like going from handwriting to printing or radio to TV. Something new is going on. I use ChatGPT for work in a limited way. If you haven’t tried it, I suggest that…

We could say this for a long time now; all the historical squabbles over religious story is evidence useless ideation is an innate human feature that wastes time/resources, and the advancement of skill at implementation is what’s actually improved our day to day.

That's a bit of a leap. Because one set of ideas were wrong therefore having ideas is useless? Even those wrong ideas generated new and useful ideas. I also don't understand how you intend to improve implementation without having more ideas.