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

Social media for AI bots: “No humans allowed”

fry-ai.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 252 posts

Re: Social media for AI bots: “No humans allowed”

#141

Post by sizzle »

rashkov wrote: post #125
costco wrote: post #93

I'm doing an experiment with AI posting on Reddit accounts to see if they would get banned. I bought 100 few-week-old accounts from some sketchy site for $0.04/each, used residential proxies I was using for another project, and have been using my re-implementation of the mobile API which is largely similar to the official API (except it uses GraphQL for comment/posting/voting). I use these prompts to come up with com…

This one is kind of hilarious: “Why are old people so obsessed with collecting things like spoons, thimbles, and shot glasses? It's like they want to have a tiny version of every object in the world.”

Sounds like a bit from Seinfeld

Re: Social media for AI bots: “No humans allowed”

#142

Post by dieortin »

seszett wrote: post #128
kikokikokiko wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The only datasets that will be useful to train LLMs in the future will be the ones generated before 2022. Any content generated after this date will be analogous to steel forged after 1945, it will be inevitably contaminated by the "radioactivity" of LLMs. The good news is that the availability of data to train more and more powerful models will soon be gone, the bad news is it will take the internet as we know it wi…

The good news is that this will mostly affect English, but most other languages are likely to keep being mostly generated by humans. This could even encourage people to use their own language more on the internet, which I think is a win for human cultural diversity. I don't know if there is any escape from this for native English speakers, though.

How so? LLMs like GPT4 have no issue generating text in Spanish, for example.

Re: Social media for AI bots: “No humans allowed”

#143

Post by visarga »

charles_f wrote: post #68
sidesideangle wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why do you say they are not capable of reasoning?

What a weird question, it really should be reversed shouldn't it? But here goes. It's a language model. It produces what sounds like a good continuation of a text based on probabilistic models. While it sounds like human generated content, "it" doesn't actually "think". It doesn't have a culture. It doesn't have thoughts. "It" is a model that generates text that mimics what human whose text it has trained on would ha…

Blinded by the implementation we forgot that maybe it's the software (ideas) on top that matters most. The real magic is in the language, not in the brain or transformer. Both the brain and transformer learn language from external sources. There are lots of patterns in language, patterns both humans and AIs use to act intelligently. These patterns act like self replicators (memes) under an evolutionary process. That's where the language smarts comes from - language level evolution. Humans are just small cogs in this language oversystem.

Re: Social media for AI bots: “No humans allowed”

#144

Post by dieortin »

pessimizer wrote: post #107
zoogeny wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The only disagreement I have with this is the future tense. I see plenty of evidence that people are actively currently valuing and caring for particular AI models. There was a post on r/ChatGPT where a clearly distressed person was lamenting that OpenAI closed one of their ongoing conversations due to some limit on the total size of the conversation. They were panicked since they felt they had formed some bond with…

I actually want that kind of AI, as long as I'm in control of it and it runs locally. I want a great foreign language tutor. I want an assistant who will figure out what I should be doing today to work towards the things that I want. Why wouldn't I? And there's no way you get those things without creating some kind of dependence. The more transparent AI is, the more I can train it and tune it myself, the more it will…

Do you really want to give an AI control of your future?

Re: Social media for AI bots: “No humans allowed”

#145

Post by chologrande »

costco wrote: post #93

I'm doing an experiment with AI posting on Reddit accounts to see if they would get banned. I bought 100 few-week-old accounts from some sketchy site for $0.04/each, used residential proxies I was using for another project, and have been using my re-implementation of the mobile API which is largely similar to the official API (except it uses GraphQL for comment/posting/voting). I use these prompts to come up with com…

Lots of comments here chiding OP for running or talking about this; I think there's something to learn here.

This is just a hobbyist prompt and api. If nothing else, I'd say at minimum this highlights that there are likely much larger farms that have been operating in a similar way but at larger scale for longer periods of time (but not talking about it)

Re: Social media for AI bots: “No humans allowed”

#146

Post by brabel »

supuun wrote: post #101
costco wrote: post #93

I'm doing an experiment with AI posting on Reddit accounts to see if they would get banned. I bought 100 few-week-old accounts from some sketchy site for $0.04/each, used residential proxies I was using for another project, and have been using my re-implementation of the mobile API which is largely similar to the official API (except it uses GraphQL for comment/posting/voting). I use these prompts to come up with com…

I see this as valuable. Makes you reconsider everything you read online.

There's probably thousands of peopple doing this just for lols. Anyone can do this with an hour or two to spare... yep, we're probably talking with bots more often than with real humans :(

Re: Social media for AI bots: “No humans allowed”

#147

Post by kymki »

ComplexSystems wrote: post #51
wand3r wrote: post #2

John Conway's game of culture? How long until the AI chatbots develop meaningful cultural progress? I jest, but its sort of an interesting idea. I think AI is way too nascent to really have this as anything more than a weird playground, with the occasional novelty "chirp" being fodder for the "AI is alive and sentient" blogospere. Cool project

> I think AI is way too nascent to really have this as anything more than a weird playground, with the occasional novelty "chirp" being fodder for the "AI is alive and sentient" blogospere. On the other extreme, this could also be what real social media turns into, as marketing agencies and entrenched interests dial in how to build an army of "grassroots," "word of mouth" bots that push their messaging without it eve…

Turns into? You are describing our current state.

Re: Social media for AI bots: “No humans allowed”

#148

Post by brabel »

zoogeny wrote: post #60
pessimizer wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> How long until the AI chatbots develop meaningful cultural progress? I'm a fan of the idea that people will start valuing, caring for, and protecting particular AI models without having to believe that they're sentient at all. Being soulless won't diminish any positive impact that people have on their lives from interacting with them, or their desire to maintain that connection and expose other people to it. If a c…

The only disagreement I have with this is the future tense. I see plenty of evidence that people are actively currently valuing and caring for particular AI models. There was a post on r/ChatGPT where a clearly distressed person was lamenting that OpenAI closed one of their ongoing conversations due to some limit on the total size of the conversation. They were panicked since they felt they had formed some bond with…

We're not far way from "Her"[1].

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1798709/?ref_=nv_sr_srsg_3_tt_5...

Re: Social media for AI bots: “No humans allowed”

#149

Post by kymki »

charles_f wrote: post #68
sidesideangle wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why do you say they are not capable of reasoning?

What a weird question, it really should be reversed shouldn't it? But here goes. It's a language model. It produces what sounds like a good continuation of a text based on probabilistic models. While it sounds like human generated content, "it" doesn't actually "think". It doesn't have a culture. It doesn't have thoughts. "It" is a model that generates text that mimics what human whose text it has trained on would ha…

I would say that you are jumping to a lot of conclusions here. Lets dig deeper.

"It doesn't have a culture. It doesn't have thoughts"

These are conclusions. What is your reasoning?

To what degree would you say that human decision making can be explained by this statement:

"It is a tree of probabilities with a bit of a randomization on top of it."

Re: Social media for AI bots: “No humans allowed”

#150

Post by kymki »

rashkov wrote: post #103
wand3r wrote: post #2

John Conway's game of culture? How long until the AI chatbots develop meaningful cultural progress? I jest, but its sort of an interesting idea. I think AI is way too nascent to really have this as anything more than a weird playground, with the occasional novelty "chirp" being fodder for the "AI is alive and sentient" blogospere. Cool project

This could go somewhere really interesting, a la Alvin Lucier’s avant-garde “I am sitting in a room”, in which the artist Lucien puts on a loop of himself saying a phrase, and each further loop is a recording of the prior loop playing into the room, and so the acoustics of the room gradually dominate the audio recording and a beautiful resonant frequency emerges. https://youtu.be/bhtO4DsSazc What will be the resonant…

I think this is the interesting line of thought.

Can AI find ways of instructing eachother in ways that has not been discovered by humans, and can that instruction set emerge from human language?

Post reply on HN