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

Auto-grading decade-old Hacker News discussions with hindsight

karpathy.bearblog.dev

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 285 posts

Re: Auto-grading decade-old Hacker News discussions with hindsight

#181

Post by jacquesm »

godelski wrote: post #134
jacquesm wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Given the quality of the judgment I'm not worried, there is no value here. To properly execute this idea rather than to just toss it off without putting in the work to make it valuable is exactly what irritates me about a lot of AI work. You can be 900 times as productive at producing mental popcorn, but if there was value to be had here we're not getting it, just a whiff of it. Sure, fun project. But I don't feel pa…

I think you're missing the actual problem. I'm not worried about this project but instead harvesting, analyzing all that data and deanonymizing people. That's exactly what Karparthy is saying. He's not being shy about it. He said "behave because the future panopticon can look into the past". Which makes the panopticon effectively exist now. Be good, future LLMs are watching ... or humans using them might be That's th…

Yes, you are right, this is a real problem. But it really is just a variation on 'the internet never forgets', for instance in relation to teen behavior online. But AI allows for weaponization of such information. I wish the wannabe politicians of 2050 much good luck with their careers, they are going to be the most boring people available.

Re: Auto-grading decade-old Hacker News discussions with hindsight

#183

Post by OccamsMirror »

pixl97 wrote: post #180
bryanrasmussen wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>The former is the boring, linear prediction. right, because if there is one thing that history shows us again and again is that things that have a period of huge improvements never plateau but instead continue improving to infinity. Improvement to infinity, that is the sober and wise bet!

Tiger: humans will never beat tigers because tigers are purpose built killing machines and they are just generalist --40,000BC

You don't think humans hunted tigers in 40,000BC?

Re: Auto-grading decade-old Hacker News discussions with hindsight

#184

Post by OccamsMirror »

p-e-w wrote: post #146
bryanrasmussen wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>The former is the boring, linear prediction. right, because if there is one thing that history shows us again and again is that things that have a period of huge improvements never plateau but instead continue improving to infinity. Improvement to infinity, that is the sober and wise bet!

The prediction that a new technology that is being heavily researched plateaus after just 5 years of development is certainly a daring one. I can’t think of an example from history where that happened.

Perhaps the fact that you think this field is only 5 years old means you're probably not enough of an authority to comment confidently on it?

Re: Auto-grading decade-old Hacker News discussions with hindsight

#185

Post by patcon »

karpathy wrote: post #54
hackthemack wrote: post #49

I noticed the Hall of Fame grading of predictive comments has a quirk? It grades some comments about if they came true or not, but in the grading of comment to the article https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10654216 The Cannons on the B-29 Bomber "accurate account of LeMay stripping turrets and shifting to incendiary area bombing; matches mainstream history" It gave a good grade to user cstross but to my reading of…

Yes I noticed a few of these around. The LLM is a little too willing to give out grades for comments that were good/bad in a bit more general sense, even if they weren't making strong predictions specifically. Another thing I noticed is that the LLM has a very impressive recognition of the various usernames and who they belong to, and I think shows a little bit of a bias in its evaluations based on the identity of th…

I think you were getting at this, but in case others didn't know: cstross is a famous sci-fi author and futurist :)

Re: Auto-grading decade-old Hacker News discussions with hindsight

#187

Post by p-e-w »

OccamsMirror wrote: post #184
p-e-w wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The prediction that a new technology that is being heavily researched plateaus after just 5 years of development is certainly a daring one. I can’t think of an example from history where that happened.

Perhaps the fact that you think this field is only 5 years old means you're probably not enough of an authority to comment confidently on it?

Claiming that AI in anything resembling its current form is older than 5 years is like claiming the history of the combustion engine started when an ape picked up a burning stick.

Re: Auto-grading decade-old Hacker News discussions with hindsight

#188

Post by kbenson »

tptacek wrote: post #69

'pcwalton, I'm coming for you. You're going down. Kidding aside, the comments it picks out for us are a little random. For instance, this was an A+ predictive thread (it appears to be rating threads and not individual comments): https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10703512 But there's just 11 comments, only 1 for me, and it's like a 1-sentence comment. I do love that my unaccredited-access-to-startup-shares take is…

I noticed from reviewing my own entry (which honestly I'm surprised exists) that the idea of what it thinks constitutes a "prediction" is fairly open to interpretation, or at least that adding some nuance to a small aspect in a thread to someone else prediction counts quite heavily. I don't really view how I've participated here over the years in any way as making predictions. I actually thought I had done a fairly good job at not making predictions, by design.

Re: Auto-grading decade-old Hacker News discussions with hindsight

#189

Post by schoen »

Rperry2174 wrote: post #74

One thing this really highlights to me is how often the "boring" takes end up being the most accurate. The provocative, high-energy threads are usually the ones that age the worst. If an LLM were acting as a kind of historian revisiting today’s debates with future context, I’d bet it would see the same pattern again and again: the sober, incremental claims quietly hold up, while the hyperconfident ones collapse. Some…

I predict that, in 2035, 1+1=2. I also predict that, in 2045, 2+2=4. I also predict that, in 2055, 3+3=6.

By 2065, we should be in possession of a proof that 0+0=0. Hopefully by the following year we will also be able to confirm that 0*0=0.

(All arithmetic here is over the natural numbers.)

Post reply on HN