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

The AI bullshit singularity

successfulsoftware.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 187 posts

Re: The AI bullshit singularity

#61

Post by opportune »

rebolek wrote: post #28
opportune wrote: post #7

The internet is already mostly filled with low quality bullshit though, and GPT-4/Gemini are much better writers than whoever is churning out SEO as we know it now. It's a lazy argument to imply this 1. invalidates the technological achievement 2. prevents iterative improvement a la the singularity. For one, the Internet itself is not bullshit just because a lot of spammers/hustlers put bad content on it to try to ma…

If LLM needs so much babysitting then singularity is certainly not going to happen.

What does me telling LLMs to write articles for "best vacuum cleaners 2024" and putting it on the Internet have to do with the ability of LLMs to improve themselves? Humans write those kinds of articles for the Internet as it is, and yet humans are the ones designing and improving LLMs now.

Re: The AI bullshit singularity

#62

Post by celdon25 »

scottbez1 wrote: post #20

Succinctly stated and something that resonates strongly with me. In the last internet revolution (web search), results started high quality because the inputs were high quality - bloggers and others just wanted to document and share knowledge. But over time, many interests (largely commercial) figured out how to game the system with SEO, and quality of search results has decreased as search's incentive structure led…

The comparison is only valid if AI ends up being monopolized. A continuously evolving ecosystem on the other hand has a better chance of adapting to those pressures. I am sure there are search engines that don’t index the SEO crap, but I don’t remember the names, and they have other flaws.

Open source AI needs to get a lot of investment for this to be mitigated. Relying on market incentives to drive development without the possibility of forking is too dangerous given the high stakes.

Re: The AI bullshit singularity

#64

Post by Solvency »

scottbez1 wrote: post #20

Succinctly stated and something that resonates strongly with me. In the last internet revolution (web search), results started high quality because the inputs were high quality - bloggers and others just wanted to document and share knowledge. But over time, many interests (largely commercial) figured out how to game the system with SEO, and quality of search results has decreased as search's incentive structure led…

This comment/sentiment/idea has already been thoroughly discussed, shared, retweeted, posted, and echoed a couple thousand times online already. Humans like you have been redundantly saying the same things in varying degrees of novelty, like this, for centuries.

Re: The AI bullshit singularity

#65

Post by [deleted] »

echelon wrote: post #18
jsheard wrote: post #5

The same goes for image generation models, AI art already has a tendency to veer into the same clichés and those are only going to get reinforced if newer models are trained on newer scrapes which now include the million hyper-derivative AI images being uploaded to places like DeviantArt, Twitter and Pixiv every day. Those vendors who got in early have a moat in the form of untainted scrapes, but they'll eventually n…

This is such a wrong take. Even if the data is 100% synthetic, you can still hill climb to new mountains. If you don't believe me, look at evolution. It doesn't matter if we no longer have 100% human art as input. This is the worst these systems will ever look and feel, and they're only going to improve. I'd be willing to do a longbets on this one.

[deleted]

Re: The AI bullshit singularity

#66

Post by TaylorAlexander »

scottbez1 wrote: post #20

Succinctly stated and something that resonates strongly with me. In the last internet revolution (web search), results started high quality because the inputs were high quality - bloggers and others just wanted to document and share knowledge. But over time, many interests (largely commercial) figured out how to game the system with SEO, and quality of search results has decreased as search's incentive structure led…

I think it’s clear that LLMs cannot be the end state of this technology, and we will need systems that can reason and develop hypotheses and test them internally. These systems may benefit from more curated datasets (such as those collected before the bullshit wave began) along with real world interaction data from YouTube and robotics. Such systems could eventually be used to rank web pages for their bullshit level, which of course would present a risk of censorship but when used properly could lead to insightful data handling.

It’s just really clear that a giant text averaging machine can only go so far, and while we do see some higher level emergent properties, we’re going to have to move beyond the current state of the art in the next decade, and such future systems may be much less affected by the internet’s bullshit. Even without the bullshit singularity I think such measures would be a necessity and we would see them developed soon.

Re: The AI bullshit singularity

#67

Post by cookie_monsta »

ieie3366 wrote: post #33

Have you actually used an LLM? GPT-4 is (well was before turbo) an anti-bullshit machine. You could ask it any question, ”why does my hair look dead if using a hairdryer” and it actually gave an on-point 100% relevant no-bullshit answer. Try googling that, it’s a million seo spam results, none which answer the question

I'm not disagreeing with your point, but this is a really bad example. Google does pretty well with that exact question, including this at #8 (for me at least):

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3229938/

Re: The AI bullshit singularity

#68

Post by __loam »

scottbez1 wrote: post #20

Succinctly stated and something that resonates strongly with me. In the last internet revolution (web search), results started high quality because the inputs were high quality - bloggers and others just wanted to document and share knowledge. But over time, many interests (largely commercial) figured out how to game the system with SEO, and quality of search results has decreased as search's incentive structure led…

We may enter into a highly ironic regime where ai companies subsidize writers and artists at scale to produce better data.

Re: The AI bullshit singularity

#69

Post by davesque »

On the bright side, it might force those engaged in research to figure out just what exactly it is that makes their models work to begin with. Turns out knowledge is about more than just modeling statistics.

Re: The AI bullshit singularity

#70

Post by danielovichdk »

I have absolutely no idea why people are so worried.

There is a human choice in a lot of matters, especially when it comes to how and why one perceives quality.

Quality in literature. Food. Arts. Fashion. Blogs. Programming. Acting. And all such things.

What I believe, based on a both cultural and philosophy stance at where the world is and where its going, is that, at best, so-called AI will push an even larger human segment towards finding the truth for oneself in a different and orginal aspect in terms of being human and how one perceives reality.

I think that the intelligent and thoughtful individual will find plenty of ways to nuture one's own abilities towards quality, which has always been the only true real value you can measure yourself against.

No one will stand a chance against the fluff and the obvious stupidity of "my ai will call your ai" and therfore, the only real direction to follow is the one that gives you an edge for yourself based on your fundamental skills you learn through years and years of experience and personality.

The reason great books are great is not that it's written. It's that it sips through the words and sentences, by their very human authors, that you can feel them inside of you.

There will be, is my belief, a larger calling in the world for removing oneself from the fast paced results which has absolutely no nerve or soul.

I am not afraid at all. I only feel sorry for the humans that has nothing to give in themselves to obtain a larger meaning with their time spent, in whatever profession or life they pursue.

Post reply on HN