I'll refrain from providing code that involve concepts as you're under 18 • Hacker News Board

Re: I'll refrain from providing code that involve concepts as you're under 18

#151

Post by xvector » Wed, Mar 06, 2024, 1:48 AM UTC

balder1991 wrote: post #150

mrweasel wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One podcast (Coder Radio) suggested that it might be due to corporate culture and people being afraid of reporting issues upward. While I do think it's culture, I think it stems from Googles advertising based business model. I believe they have attempted to make their LLM safe for advertisers and prefer to err on the side of being safe, even if the risk of being non-brand-safe is minimum.

Probably not exactly afraid of reporting things, but no incentive to do so. Corporate culture has a lot of this “not my problem” mentality.

You are not gonna report dumb DEI initiatives if the DEI crowd will get you fired for it. And this is how you end up with LLMs that refuse to teach C++ due to "safety" or trying to convince us that Abraham Lincoln was Black and Nazis had Hispanics.

Fundamentally these megacorporations need to drop these useless non-engineering functions (not that all non-engineering is useless, but these functions are) if they really want to get to AGI.

Re: I'll refrain from providing code that involve concepts as you're under 18

#152

Post by cfr2023 » Wed, Mar 06, 2024, 12:31 PM UTC

Brian_K_White wrote: post #125

cfr2023 wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It seems every domain and human endeavor in existence has some form of disagreement between practitioners who desire progress/advancement and people who are content to never change or learn anything new, in spite of glaringly obvious benefits. It's brave to say that no one has come up with better ideas than Unix and C because it's bound to rile up users of (your favorite platform + language here). I also think that s…

You don't get to say for/anti progress when there isn't a consensus definition of progress. All progress is change. All change is not progress. A programmer or someone presuming to opine on programming, who overlooks a thing like that, exposes and advertizes that their opinions in such a domain are of questionable value.

>You don't get to say for/anti progress when there isn't a consensus definition of progress.

You seem to think that a firm consensus definition is needed for something to be considered progress, which exposes and advertises that your opinion in the domain is highly combative and dysfunctional.

Re: I'll refrain from providing code that involve concepts as you're under 18

#153

Post by cfr2023 » Wed, Mar 06, 2024, 12:37 PM UTC

Brian_K_White wrote: post #125

cfr2023 wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It seems every domain and human endeavor in existence has some form of disagreement between practitioners who desire progress/advancement and people who are content to never change or learn anything new, in spite of glaringly obvious benefits. It's brave to say that no one has come up with better ideas than Unix and C because it's bound to rile up users of (your favorite platform + language here). I also think that s…

You don't get to say for/anti progress when there isn't a consensus definition of progress. All progress is change. All change is not progress. A programmer or someone presuming to opine on programming, who overlooks a thing like that, exposes and advertizes that their opinions in such a domain are of questionable value.

Seriously though, if it is your world view that a consensus definition is needed for an initiative to be considered truly progressive, has the world made any progress at all in any domain?

Fossil fuels are widely implicated in climate change, opponents want to see them phased out, but I doubt they would deny that their use has ushered progress for humanity.

Your reply suggests you might be feeling hurt that someone has picked on your favorite tech stack or that you're getting bullied at work by people who see you as closed minded. They might be on to something.

Re: I'll refrain from providing code that involve concepts as you're under 18

#154

Post by idonotknowwhy » Thu, Mar 07, 2024, 2:31 AM UTC

dvt wrote: post #71

Piggy-backing on my other comment[1], and I know everyone's on the anti-Google bandwaggon, but OpenAI also fails miserably here: https://imgur.com/a/r0BXX9G [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39583473#39584055

Miqu-70b (mistral-medium leaked model) does that as well lmao

https://imgur.com/a/lKUynmf

Edit: Claud3 Opus also refuses. GPT-4 complies though.

Re: I'll refrain from providing code that involve concepts as you're under 18

#155

Post by larodi » Thu, Mar 07, 2024, 7:56 PM UTC

One thing that we can all be sure is that Google is going to launch this same product over and over again for the foreseeable future. This is like the third official iteration. If they don’t succeed at some point convincing at large that their product is at least as good as OpenAI’s, well then their whole search ads business is doomed.

Which I guess means even more YouTube ads.

Re: I'll refrain from providing code that involve concepts as you're under 18

#156

Post by cfr2023 » Fri, Mar 08, 2024, 10:51 AM UTC

Brian_K_White wrote: post #125

cfr2023 wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It seems every domain and human endeavor in existence has some form of disagreement between practitioners who desire progress/advancement and people who are content to never change or learn anything new, in spite of glaringly obvious benefits. It's brave to say that no one has come up with better ideas than Unix and C because it's bound to rile up users of (your favorite platform + language here). I also think that s…

You don't get to say for/anti progress when there isn't a consensus definition of progress. All progress is change. All change is not progress. A programmer or someone presuming to opine on programming, who overlooks a thing like that, exposes and advertizes that their opinions in such a domain are of questionable value.

The stupidity of this post keeps me coming back to see if I can get more humorous broken logic from you.

Because a rigorous operational definition of “progress” is not provided in this brief post, you assume it is missing, just to heckle someone making the uncontroversial claim that there will always be people on both sides of initiatives intended to foster progress in a given area. A hilarious thing to be triggered by.

How would “achieving an organization’s mission statement within budget” or “improving working conditions for knowledge workers by creating more accessible tools” or “using fewer labor hours on repetitive tasks” or “creating custom tools tailored to specific tasks and using less electricity”.

But maybe any of those non-technical goals can all be achieved using the same old tech, and it’s people complaining about their feelings of disconnection from ancient telecom vestiges that are really impeding progress. Maybe the it is the masses that don’t get it, and it is the select few that truly understand things that get to define progress, while insisting that the power is kept in their hands, and that the work is done in their preferred paradigms.

Or maybe I am projecting all of this onto you to return the favor lol