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

We're losing our voice to LLMs

tonyalicea.dev

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 425 posts

Re: We're losing our voice to LLMs

#291

Post by iwontberude »

IMTDb wrote: post #71
Lapel2742 wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> it's how the algorithms promote engagement. They are destroying our democratic societies and should be heavily regulated. The same will become true for AI.

> should be heavily regulated. By who, exactly? It’s easy to call for regulation when you assume the regulator will conveniently share your worldview. Try the opposite: imagine the person in charge is someone whose opinions make your skin crawl. If you still think regulation beats the status quo, then the call for regulation is warranted, but be ready to face the consequences. But if picturing that guy running the sh…

Recasting regulation as a desire for control is too reductive. The other point of regulation is compromise. No compromise at all is just a wasted opportunity.

Re: We're losing our voice to LLMs

#292

Post by randcraw »

LogicFailsMe wrote: post #69
chemotaxis wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's not just LLMs, it's how the algorithms promote engagement. i.e. rage bait, videos with obvious inaccuracies etc. I guess, but I'm on quite a few "algorithm-free" forums where the same thing happens. I think it's just human nature. The reason it's under control on HN is rigorous moderation; when the moderators are asleep, you often see dubious political stuff bubble up. And in the comments, there's often a fair…

I would be intrigued by using an LLM to detect content like this and hold it for moderation. The elevator pitch would be training an LLM to be the moderator because that's what people want to hear, but it's most likely going to end up a moderator's assistant.

I think the curation of all media content using your own LLM that has been tuned using your own custom criteria _must_ become the future of media.

We've long done this personally at the level of a TV news network, magazine, newspaper, or website -- choosing info sources that were curated and shaped by gatekeeper editors. But with the demise of curated news, it's becoming necessary for each of us to somehow filter the myriad individual info sources ourselves. Ideally this will be done using a method smart enough to take our instructions and route only approved content to us, while explaining what was approved/denied and being capable of being corrected and updated. Ergo, the LLM-based custom configured personal news gateway is born.

Of course the criteria driving your 'smart' info filter could be much more clever than allowing all content from specific writers. It could review each piece for myriad strengths/weaknesses (originality, creativity, novel info, surprise factor, counter intuitiveness, trustworthiness, how well referenced, etc) so that this LLM News Curator could reliably deliver a mix of INTERESTING content rather than the repetitively predictable pablum that editor-curated media prefers to serve up.

Re: We're losing our voice to LLMs

#295

Post by carlosjobim »

vladms wrote: post #104
Lapel2742 wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> it's how the algorithms promote engagement. They are destroying our democratic societies and should be heavily regulated. The same will become true for AI.

My view is that they are just exposing issues with the people in the said societies and now is harder to ignore them. Much of the hate and the fear and the envy that I see on social networks have other reasons, but people are having difficulties to address those. With or without social networks this anger will go somewhere, don't think regulation alone can fix that. Let's hope it will be something transformative not…

Is hate, fear, or envy by themselves wrong, or only wrong when misdirected?

What if social media and the internet at large is now exposing people to things which before ha been kept hidden from them, or distorted? Are people wrong to feel hate?

I know the time before the internet, when a very select few decided what the public should know and not know, what they should feel, what they should do and how they should behave. The internet is not the first mass communications, neither are social media or LLMs. The public has been manipulated and mind primed by mass media for over a century now.

The largest bloodshed events World War I and II were orchestrated by lunatics screaming in the radio or screaming behind a pulpit, and the public eagerly being herded by them to the bloodshed.

This comment isn't in opposition to yours, it's just riffing on what you said.

Re: We're losing our voice to LLMs

#296

Post by khannn »

xeonmc wrote: post #264
khannn wrote: post #248

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They're saying that the shared account is enough for OpenAI to provide the same result. Very interesting, I'd like to know more like was it a generic IUD or a specific one in the query. Also, the Doc is a cardiologist, they don't specialize in Gyno stuff and their training/schooling is enough for them to evaluate sources. Just for reference before AI it was typical for employers of doctors to pay for a service/app ca…

Itemized Bill: - hitting the ChatGPT button: $1 - knowing where to hit the ChatGPT button: $600k/year

I know some GPs that use WebMD so it plays out like:

- Google search: free

- Having the schooling, training, and experience to evaluate the results: $300k per year

Re: We're losing our voice to LLMs

#297

Post by iwontberude »

krapp wrote: post #270
macintux wrote: post #253

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And HN doesn't choose to show you targeted, inflammatory content based on your history. That's a huge difference from Facebook.

Most people on HN who advocate regulating social media don't only want to prevent those platforms from showing targeted inflammatory content, they want to make all algorithmic feeds other than strictly chronological illegal, as well as moderation of any legal content. From that point of view, Hacker News is little different than Facebook. One could even argue that HN's karma system is a dark pattern designed to breed…

At least HN karma is incremental and based on something approximating merit as opposed to being a slot machine where you never know which comment will earn Karma. More effort or rare insight, generally yields more karma.

Re: We're losing our voice to LLMs

#298

Post by femiagbabiaka »

gorbachev wrote: post #228
alt227 wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I personally dont feel like an ultra filtered social media which only shows me things I agree with is a good thing. Exposing yourself to things you dont agre with is what helps us all question our own beliefs and prejudeces, and grow as people. To me, only seeing things you know you are already interested in is no better than another company curating it for me.

I've mentioned this a few times in the past, but I'm convinced that filters that exclude work much better than filters that include. Instead of algorithms pushing us content it thinks we like (or what the advertisers are paying them to push on us), the relationship should be reversed and the algorithms should push us all content except the content we don't like. Killfiles on Usenet newsreaders worked this way and the…

I’m at risk of sounding like an atproto shill at this point, but check out https://www.graze.social/.

I think every social media platform should allow something like this. You can make filters that work in either direction.

Re: We're losing our voice to LLMs

#299

Post by muldvarp »

AstroBen wrote: post #67

There's something unique about art and writing where we just don't want to see computers do it As soon as I know something is written by AI I tune out. I don't care how good it is - I'm not interested if a person didn't go through the process of writing it

Writing nice sounding text used to require effort and attention to detail. This is no longer the case and this very useful heuristic has been completely obliterated by LLMs.

For me personally, this means that I read less on the internet and more pre-LLM books. It's a sad development nevertheless.

Re: We're losing our voice to LLMs

#300

Post by tetraca »

Subsume your agency. Stop writing. Stop learning. Stop thinking for yourself. Become hylic. Just let the machine think everything for you and act as it acts. Those that own them are benevolent and there will never be consequences.
Post reply on HN