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

191–200 of 285 posts

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

#191

Post by autoexec »

onraglanroad wrote: post #101
yunwal wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Are you going to make the bet that they will continue to make similarly huge improvements Sure yeah why not > taking them well past human ability, At what? They're already better than me at reciting historical facts. You'd need some actual prediction here for me to give you "prescience".

At every intellectual task. They're already better than you at reciting historical facts. I'd guess they're probably better at composing poems (they're not great but far better than the average person). Or you agree with me? I'm not looking for prescience marks, I'm just less convinced that people really make the more boring and obvious predictions.

> They're already better than you at reciting historical facts.

They're better at regurgitating historical facts than me because they were trained on historical facts written by many humans other than me who knew a lot more historical facts. None of those facts came from an LLM. Every historical fact that isn't entirely LLM generated nonsense came from a human. It's the humans that were intelligent, not the fancy autocomplete.

Now that LLMs have consumed the bulk of humanity's written knowledge on history what's left for it to suck up will be mainly its own slop. Exactly because LLMs are not even a little bit intelligent they will regurgitate that slop with exactly as much ignorance as to what any of it means as when it was human generated facts, and they'll still spew it back out with all the confidence they've been programed to emulate. I predict that the resulting output will increasingly shatter the illusion of intelligence you've so thoroughly fallen for so far.

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

#192

Post by johncolanduoni »

Tossrock wrote: post #190

So where do I collect my prize for this 2015 comment? https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9882217

Never call a man happy until he is dead. Also I don’t think your argument generalizes well - there are plenty of private research investment bubbles that have popped and not reached their original peaks (e.g. VR).

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

#193

Post by godelski »

jacquesm wrote: post #181
godelski wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

The internet never forgets but you could be anonymous. Or at least somewhat. But that's getting harder and harder

If such a thing isn't already possible (it is to a certain extent), we are headed towards a point where your words alone will be enough to fingerprint you.

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

#194

Post by godelski »

acyou wrote: post #171
godelski wrote: post #96

> I was reminded again of my tweets that said "Be good, future LLMs are watching". You can take that in many directions, but here I want to focus on the idea that future LLMs are watching. Everything we do today might be scrutinized in great detail in the future because doing so will be "free". A lot of the ways people behave currently I think make an implicit "security by obscurity" assumption. But if intelligence r…

I call this the "judgement day" scenario. I would be interested if there is some science fiction based on this premise. If you believe in God of a certain kind, you don't think that being judged for your sins is unacceptable or even good or bad in itself, you consider it inevitable. We have already talked it over for 2000 years, people like the idea.

You'll be interested in Clarke's "The Light of Other Days". Basically a wormhole where people can look back at any point in time, ending all notion of privacy.

God is different though. People like God because they believe God is fair and infallible. That is not true for machines nor men. Similarly I do not think people will like this idea. I'm sure there will be some but look at people today and their religious fever. Or look in the past. They'll want it, but it is fleeting. Cults don't last forever, even when they're governments. Sounds like a great way to start wars. Every one will be easily justified

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Light_of_Other_Days

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

#195

Post by khafra »

popinman322 wrote: post #179

It doesn't look like the code anonymizes usernames when sending the thread for grading. This likely induces bias in the grades based on past/current prevailing opinions of certain users. It would be interesting to see the whole thing done again but this time randomly re-assigning usernames, to assess bias, and also with procedurally generated pseudonyms, to see whether the bias can be removed that way. I'd expect de-…

You can't anonymize comments from well-known users, to an LLM: https://gwern.net/doc/statistics/stylometry/truesight/index

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

#196

Post by Tossrock »

johncolanduoni wrote: post #192
Tossrock wrote: post #190

So where do I collect my prize for this 2015 comment? https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9882217

Never call a man happy until he is dead. Also I don’t think your argument generalizes well - there are plenty of private research investment bubbles that have popped and not reached their original peaks (e.g. VR).

It wasn't a generalized argument, though, it was a specific one, about AI.

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

#197

Post by mcmoor »

jacquesm wrote: post #115
johnfn wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This suggests that the best way to grade predictions is some sort of weighting of how unlikely they were at the time. Like, if you were to open a prediction market for statement X, some sort of grade of the delta between your confidence of the event and the “expected” value, summed over all your predictions.

Exactly, that's the element that is missing. If there are 50 comments against and one pro and that pro has it in the longer term then that is worth noticing, not when there are 50 comments pro and you were one of the 'pros'. Going against the grain and turning out right is far more valuable than being right consistently when the crowd is with you already.

Yeah a simple of total points of pro comments vs total points of con comments may be simple and exact enough to simulate a prediction market. I don't know if it can be included in the prompt or better to be vibecoded in directly.

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

#200

Post by prawn »

modeless wrote: post #40

This is a cool idea. I would install a Chrome extension that shows a score by every username on this site grading how well their expressed opinions match what subsequently happened in reality, or the accuracy of any specific predictions they've made. Some people's opinions are closer to reality than others and it's not always correlated with upvotes. An extension of this would be to grade people on the accuracy of th…

Didn't Slashdot have something like the second point with their meta-moderation, many many years ago?
Post reply on HN