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

GPT-2: Too Dangerous To Release (2019)

naokishibuya.github.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 139 posts

Re: GPT-2: Too Dangerous To Release (2019)

#91

Post by GTP »

Qhemlomo wrote: post #21
minimaxir wrote: post #8

Back in 2019, it was more fair to have caution around the larger GPT-2 models since robust text generation (by 2019 standards) was a complete unknown. For something like Mythos in 2026, where now the social implications of better LLMs are more understood, it's more fair to call it (EDIT: specifically, the declaration of its danger) a marketing gimmick.

How is this a gimmick? It changes my whole profession on a level i couldn't even imagine how we would 'solve' software engineering.

Has it been released to the public yet? Genuine question. Because if you didn't try it yourself, you have to rely on others' reports. And different people who tried it on different projects got different results, leading to different conclusions.

Re: GPT-2: Too Dangerous To Release (2019)

#92

Post by GTP »

Qhemlomo wrote: post #64
stanmancan wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can scaffold out a simple app pretty easily. Anything large or complex things break down. If you don’t know what you’re doing you end up leaking secrets like the dozens of examples we’ve seen so far.

You know what the problem is in software engineering? A LOT of people have no clue what good software engineering is. I was working in a company before which used md5 in 2015! Databases on the internet with a 5 character password. No tests. A person i know would have broken the whole production DB if i wouldn't have stoped the PR. Another ex-collegue thought its okay to 'encrypt' with a basic shift cyper creditcard d…

> You know what the problem is in software engineering? A LOT of people have no clue what good software engineering is.

Indeed. Is Mythos going to change this?

Re: GPT-2: Too Dangerous To Release (2019)

#93

Post by qurren »

applfanboysbgon wrote: post #80
qurren wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On the other hand, maybe it makes people just get off the internet and value in-person interactions more. I've stopped scrolling social media and tired of seeing fake landscapes, fake foods, and fake cities that don't exist.

I use the internet because I enjoy seeing what the best of humanity, globally, has to offer. There are millions of incredibly skilled individuals in the world - artists, musicians, developers, and so on - and I had access to all of them at my fingertips, both for entertainment and learning to develop my own skills. That is now being drowned out, with generated content being produced at 100x or 1000x the rate of human…

I've also more or less stopped posting my photography on Instagram because (1) my Instagram feed is now full of AI images getting 10000 likes while I get 100; if nobody sees what I post it's not worth posting (2) people instead accuse my images of being AI even though I took painstaking effort to get to interesting actual places in the world during interesting weather (just after storms, etc.) and lighting, and this is incredibly discouraging.

Re: GPT-2: Too Dangerous To Release (2019)

#95

Post by dijksterhuis »

nonethewiser wrote: post #30
cjjfjjfjf wrote: post #6

In hindsight, they were entirely correct. The social damage caused by low cost content generation that’s hard to distinguish from human authorship is astronomical. You don’t need to entertain the more ridiculous doomsday scenarios to wish that this technology had never been created.

What is the astronomical social damage that this has caused? I am having so much trouble relating to and even understanding what the anti-AI crowd's position is. It looks like a caricature to me.

one example from today https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cewq1w7r0zgo

i'm no fan of the politician, but scams like this one are increasing at a significant rate and are a lot harder for non-technically minded people to spot, think your grandmother etc

also recently https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cg7pl7zj024o

also: grok CSAM; plundering massive swathes of copyrighted material / intellectual property; making electricity more expensive for regular folks; increasing global carbon footprint building massive data centres; destroying a whole swathe of entry level jobs for recent grads (not just software junior roles); circular funding deals to keep the bubble (scam) alive, while positioning the large companies as necessary for govt. work so when the bubble bursts tax payers will have to bail them out; people with mental health issues being left to run riot with the tool; suicides; the degradation of human knowledge workers using their knowledge (the muscle atrophies when you don't use it cos "ai said yes") ...

Re: GPT-2: Too Dangerous To Release (2019)

#96

Post by jason_oster »

realusername wrote: post #31
Qhemlomo wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How is this a gimmick? It changes my whole profession on a level i couldn't even imagine how we would 'solve' software engineering.

We still didn't "solve" software engineering, try to give Claude code access to your friends or family and see what they do with it.

My non-programmer friends have created:

- A mod manager for Vintage Story in Swift.

- A GameShark Pro adapter using an ESP32 that hosts a web app for dumping N64 ROMs and searching for cheat codes.

Re: GPT-2: Too Dangerous To Release (2019)

#97

Post by novaleaf »

GTP wrote: post #91
Qhemlomo wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How is this a gimmick? It changes my whole profession on a level i couldn't even imagine how we would 'solve' software engineering.

Has it been released to the public yet? Genuine question. Because if you didn't try it yourself, you have to rely on others' reports. And different people who tried it on different projects got different results, leading to different conclusions.

it was released a few hrs ago as "Fable 5". it's an incremental improvement over Opus 4.8.

Re: GPT-2: Too Dangerous To Release (2019)

#98

Post by jason_oster »

realusername wrote: post #83
Qhemlomo wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My partner wrote an android app which was doing what she wanted to do. She did this experiment 5 month ago and she did this in one day. My wife has 0 knowledge how any of this works. That was shocking to see. Progress is not stoping and Fable proves that.

I'd say creating a project is 5% of the job and maintaining it over time 95% of it. It's true that they can start amazing projects without guidance but then the real work begins.

There is almost no maintenance work for bespoke apps apart from infrequent updates to keep OS and hardware compatibility as the environment slowly changes.

Keep in mind, these are not products in the endless feature treadmill promoted by scrum.

Re: GPT-2: Too Dangerous To Release (2019)

#99

Post by watwut »

nonethewiser wrote: post #69
FabCH wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The president of the United States tweeted an AI generated image of himself as Jesus Christ descending from the sky and saving a sick person. I feel like that is a good example. Now multiply that by hundreds of millions of AI generated propaganda images across the world. And that’s even without touching the effect of fake videos on democracy or Elons pedo-bot that generates CSAM on demand of specific people…

> The president of the United States tweeted an AI generated image of himself as Jesus Christ descending from the sky and saving a sick person. Does that say anything about AI or everything about Donald Trump?

Both. And even more for people who still defend republican party ... which stands behind and supports Trump 100%

Re: GPT-2: Too Dangerous To Release (2019)

#100

Post by jason_oster »

jansan wrote: post #37

Same vibes: In 2000 Sony "declared that the company’s PlayStation2 has been hit with export restriction because it could be used for military purposes" "Trade officials said they initially placed restrictions on the game console because PlayStation2’s high-speed graphic processing could be used for missile guidance." [1] https://variety.com/2000/biz/news/playstation2-export-regs-e...

Good times! Iraq acquiring 4000 PS2 for military purposes was a hoax [1], but the fear was palpable at the time. I was an obnoxious teenager, ridiculing the idea of a PS2 supercomputer. It would have been approximately impossible to achieve in early 2000 due to Sony's anti-piracy measures in the console. PS2 Linux appeared around 2 years later in 2002.

[1]: https://www.eurogamer.net/article-29913

Post reply on HN