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

You did this with an AI and you do not understand what you're doing here

hackerone.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

441–450 of 571 posts

Re: You did this with an AI and you do not understand what you're doing here

#441

Post by delusional »

jackdawed wrote: post #367
Sharlin wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unfortunately that seems to be the norm now – people literally reduce themselves to a copy-paste mechanism.

I once had a conversation with a potential co-founder who literally told me he was pasting my responses into AI to try to catch up. Then a few months later, another nontechnical CEO did the same thing, after moving our conversation from SMS into email where it was very clear he was using AI. These are CEOs who have raised $1M+ pre-seed.

Have you watched All-In? Chamath Palihapitiya, who takes himself very seriously, is clearly just reading off something from ChatGPT most of the time.

These Silicon Valley CEOs are hacks.

Re: You did this with an AI and you do not understand what you're doing here

#442

Post by delusional »

xpe wrote: post #426
rjsw wrote: post #420

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I read a paper yesterday where someone had used an LLM to read other papers and was claiming that this was doing science.

> I read a paper yesterday where someone had used an LLM to read other papers and was claiming that this was doing science. I'm not trying to be facetious or eye-poking here, I promise... But I have to ask: What was the result; did the LLM generate useful new knowledge at some quality bar? At the same time, I do believe something like "Science is more than published papers; it also includes the process behind it, som…

There's no "physics-based" reason a rat couldn't cover all those aspects. That would truely make Jordan Peterson, the big rat, the worlds greatest visionary. I wouldn't count on it though.

Re: You did this with an AI and you do not understand what you're doing here

#443

Post by luisrudge »

chanon wrote: post #414
f4stjack wrote: post #410

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To be honest, I do not understand this new norm. A few months ago I applied to an internal position. I was a NGO IT worker, deployed twice to emergency response operations, knew the policies & operations and had good relations with users and coworkers. The interview went well. I was honest. When asked what my weakness regarding this position I told that I am a good analyst but when it comes to writing new exploits, t…

I posted a job for freelance dev work and all replies were obviously ai generated. Some even included websites that were clearly made by other people as their 'prior work'. So I pulled the posting and probably won't post again. Who knew. AI is costing jobs, not because it can do the jobs, but it has made hiring actual competent humans harder.

if you're still looking and it's a js/ts project, I can help. I'll use a shit ton of AI, but not when talking to you. my email is on my profile. twitter account with the same username.

Re: You did this with an AI and you do not understand what you're doing here

#444

Post by delfinom »

mock-possum wrote: post #357
jmuguy wrote: post #332

This is essentially what teachers are dealing with every day, across the majority of their students, for every subject where its even remotely possible to use AI.

Why not deal with it the same way teachers have always felt with students breaking the rules?

Because the US is assbackwards when it comes to education since the NCLB basically forces schools to make up metrics to prevent everyone losing their job through closure.

Re: You did this with an AI and you do not understand what you're doing here

#445

Post by cornholio »

unwind wrote: post #152
cornholio wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We will quickly evolve a social contract that AI are not allowed to directly contact humans and waste their time with input that was not reviewed by other humans, and any transgression should by swiftly penalized. It's essentially spam, automatically generated content that is profitable in large volume because it offsets the real cost to the victims, by wasting their limited attention span. If you wantme to read your…

Uh that sounds awesome, but if humanity worked like that then things like actual spam e-mail and "robo-calls" would not exist, right? But they do, and they have done for a while. Sorry for maybe sounding cynical, but I have a really hard time believing in your prognosis.

Well, sure they exist, stealing and murder still exists too despite our best efforts to eliminate them. The point is that they are on the fringes of our society, I get maybe one spam email every few days or so and seldom bother to review the thousands trapped in the Spam folder. Robocalling never took of in my country either, and none of these scummy industries is receiving trillions of speculative investment like AI does. Social norms work, even imperfect as is their nature.

Re: You did this with an AI and you do not understand what you're doing here

#446

Post by timeon »

deadbabe wrote: post #346
Y_Y wrote: post #284

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Indian English is not only a perfectly good dialect, it's one of the most popular worldwide. It doesn't have the prestige of the King's English, but I'd personally prefer it to some of the other colonies'.

A dialect is not good just because it is popular.

Does it matter? We are here on American site anyway - not English.

Re: You did this with an AI and you do not understand what you're doing here

#447

Post by cortesoft »

deadbabe wrote: post #182
akk0 wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You do realize English is one of India's two official languages, I hope?

Yea but you can always tell it’s an Indian because they write differently from actual English speakers.

English isn't French, there isn't an 'official version'

Re: You did this with an AI and you do not understand what you're doing here

#448

Post by sebastiennight »

balamatom wrote: post #419
Sharlin wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unfortunately that seems to be the norm now – people literally reduce themselves to a copy-paste mechanism.

We're that for genes, if you trust positivist materialism. (Recently it's also been forced to permit the existence of memes.) If that's all which is expected of a person - to be a copypastebot for vast forces beyond one's ken - why fault that person for choosing easy over hard? Because you're mad at them for being shit at the craft you've lovingly honed? They don't really know why they're there in the first place. If…

> If that's all which is expected of a person - to be a copypastebot for vast forces beyond one's ken - why fault that person for choosing easy over hard?

I wouldn't be mad at them for that, though they might be faulted for not realizing that at some point, the copy/pasting will be done without them, as it's simpler and cheaper to ask ChatGPT directly rather than playing a game of telephone.

Re: You did this with an AI and you do not understand what you're doing here

#449

Post by vultour »

scosman wrote: post #49

Spent 15 minutes the other day testing a patch I received that claimed to fix a bug (Linux UI bug, not my forte). The “fix” was setting completely fictitious properties. Someone has plugged the GitHub issue into ChatGPT, spat out an untested answer. What’s even the point…

This is why I refuse to interact with people who use AI. You have to invest orders of magnitude more time to review their hallucinated garbage than they used to generate it. I’m not going to waste my time talking to a computer.

Re: You did this with an AI and you do not understand what you're doing here

#450

Post by SAI_Peregrinus »

sealeck wrote: post #189
hermannj314 wrote: post #165

Start charging users to submit a vulnerability report. It doesn't matter if it made by AI or a human, spammers operate by cheaply overproducing and externalizing their work onto you to validate their shit. And it works because sometimes they do deliver value by virtue of large numbers. But they are a net negative for society. Their model stops working if they have to pay for the time they wasted.

Even a deposit works well (and doesn't have to be large). Someone who has actually found a serious bug in cURL will probably pay $2-5 dollars as a deposit to report (especially given the high probability of a payout).

One issue is who pays the processing fees for the deposit & refund transactions. HackerOne could work around that issue by copying the practices of video game "microtransaction" payments: sell "report points packs", say 2500 points for $25 minimum in a pack. User needs to deposit 100 points to report, for each report they open. If the report is accepted they get their 100 points back, if not they lose their 100 points. If they want to open more than 25 reports at once they need more points packs. The $25 pack is non-refundable, so there's no added transaction fee for the refund.
Post reply on HN