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

131–139 of 139 posts

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

#131

Post by dsr_ »

Qhemlomo wrote: post #125
malfist wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It changes my whole profession on a level i couldn't even imagine I assure, it doesn't.

I'm happy to have a discussion with you if you bring any argument. Before GPT what would have been your choise of architecture, setup, alogorithm if someone comes to you and says "write a tool/system which can generate code" "what do you mean generate code? How do i control it?" "by writing what you want in natural language" "puh 50 years of development, 100 billion, top tier team of linguists and software engineers…

Programming is the reification of decision-making processes. If you don't understand the decision-making process that you want, you get a different one, which at best approximates the one you want but couldn't articulate.

If you do this with COBOL or Python, at least you get consistent operation and errors when you're wrong. If you do this with any LLM, consistency is dropped in favor of obsequiousness.

The base problem is that people aren't equipped naturally to think about all the details of their problems.

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

#132

Post by throwaway85825 »

juleiie wrote: post #126
throwaway85825 wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fortunately you still get the reddit experience with AI. https://www.reddit.com/r/ChatGPT/comments/1hxa3kj/ai_reached...

I am not clicking that link. I have blocked all reddit domains in my router, using AI to retrieve answers from Reddit. You can copy paste it in reply if you want

Sure.

The quote from Gemini is: "one reddit user says kill yourself"

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

#133

Post by Qhemlomo »

dsr_ wrote: post #131
Qhemlomo wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm happy to have a discussion with you if you bring any argument. Before GPT what would have been your choise of architecture, setup, alogorithm if someone comes to you and says "write a tool/system which can generate code" "what do you mean generate code? How do i control it?" "by writing what you want in natural language" "puh 50 years of development, 100 billion, top tier team of linguists and software engineers…

Programming is the reification of decision-making processes. If you don't understand the decision-making process that you want, you get a different one, which at best approximates the one you want but couldn't articulate. If you do this with COBOL or Python, at least you get consistent operation and errors when you're wrong. If you do this with any LLM, consistency is dropped in favor of obsequiousness. The base prob…

Fine for the initial phase were you have to define the architecture and guardrails etc.

But doesn't matter anymore if you just add things.

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

#134

Post by jason_oster »

realusername wrote: post #118
jason_oster wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

I've worked on an app and I'd say the opposite, I even abandonned the app at some point due to the maintenance work involved.

I don't particularly doubt your experience. But if you have struggled to maintain an app that is effectively complete upon inception, it means that changes in your environment are so common that it's a surprise you get anything at all done.

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

#135

Post by realusername »

jason_oster wrote: post #134
realusername wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've worked on an app and I'd say the opposite, I even abandonned the app at some point due to the maintenance work involved.

I don't particularly doubt your experience. But if you have struggled to maintain an app that is effectively complete upon inception, it means that changes in your environment are so common that it's a surprise you get anything at all done.

Welcome to the world of apps, apps fits this definition yes.

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

#137

Post by Anamon »

senordevnyc wrote: post #111
malfist wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It changes my whole profession on a level i couldn't even imagine I assure, it doesn't.

It already has! It’s mind-boggling that anyone could deny this in mid-2026. Virtually every software engineer I know is no longer writing the majority of their code. Many are not writing any code, myself included. And I’m a staff engineer with 20 yoe, formerly at big tech, and now building a (profitable) SaaS of my own. The way I work is wildly different from a year ago. And no one is going back.

My experience is different. I hear a lot of developers, old and young, scaling back their LLM use now that the bills are coming in. And I don't just mean the financial bills, mostly it's about them realising that there's a lot lf shit they need to fix that the model can't handle, and they no longer understand it enough to either do it or properly prompt a model to.

The most prevalent trend I see around me today is that people are going back to using the LLMs as research, review, and sketching tools, but writing most actual code themselves again. And it's not just AI skeptics doing that, it's those who went all-in and are finally seeing the downsides and limitations of this technology, now that the hype is waning.

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

#138

Post by Anamon »

Qhemlomo wrote: post #14
EA-3167 wrote: post #4

Seven years of this insufferable brand of "Oh it's so dangerous, I sure hope no one gives us a ton of money and takes us seriously" marketing and people are still falling for it at scale.

They feared that GPT-2 could break all Spam filters. And tbh do you prefer companies not taking anything serious? Opus 4.5 def changed a lot already, GenAI changed a lot. Certain jobs are gone. Do you think the person who was translating text doesn't deserve to be taken serious? I haven't written code in a few month now and the quality of these coding agents is not getting worse, they are getting better. All of this…

No jobs are gone. The bottom, low-quality, gig economy end of some jobs may have been impacted.

Human translation is still very much a business. No lawyer or diplomat who wants to keep their job, no manufacturer of heavy machinery or medication who wants to stay in the market and not get sued, is going to use an LLM instead of a professional translator. Ask people in the business. The demamd is fine. They aren't building their revenue on translations for Joe's ice cream parlour website or private letters.

In any industry, there is at least a decently sized segment where it matters a lot that the work is actually done correctly and someone can vouch and be liable for it.

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

#139

Post by uselessTA »

minimaxir wrote: post #26
uselessTA wrote: post #7

The concern I heard was that releasing it would start an arms race for AGI, which I think it clearly did

GPT-2 did not start the LLM arms race. GPT-3's release didn't either.

it didn't because it wasn't released. As soon as it was actually released (chatGPT) it obviously did, so the general point was clearly true
Post reply on HN