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

Lex Fridman Interviews Richard Feynman

podcast.ai

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 59 posts

Re: Lex Fridman Interviews Richard Feynman

#21

Post by smt88 »

canucklady wrote: post #8
anonporridge wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You never get to close pandora's box. The only choice you have is how to decide to adapt to the new reality. Whining into the void about the new reality isn't adaptation. It's weakness.

This is such an insane worldview. Lots of things are technically possible but socially or legally discouraged. You could infringe copyright. You could steal. You could walk around naked. It's not whining to say that something is outside of social norms.

Imagine an enemy nation-state of [insert your country] decides to create a "recording" of a political candidate admitting to pedophilia.

Yes, those of us in tech would be skeptical. But 99.9% of people don't read technology or political news and don't know this is possible. They haven't been inoculated against it.

What would happen? You can't make that stigma go away.

One of Trump's only drops in polling during his first presidential campaign was due to an audio recording. In his 2023 campaign, any recording that comes out could easily be AI-generated.

If that doesn't terrify you, I don't think you've been paying enough attention to the tactics of modern authoritarian regimes.

Re: Lex Fridman Interviews Richard Feynman

#22

Post by rngname22 »

twblalock wrote: post #13
canucklady wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is such an insane worldview. Lots of things are technically possible but socially or legally discouraged. You could infringe copyright. You could steal. You could walk around naked. It's not whining to say that something is outside of social norms.

When it's trivially easy to break the law and there are no obvious victims, and it can be done on computers, those rules go out the window. Almost everyone who shared music on Napster would have never shoplifted a CD from a record store. Almost everyone who shares TV episodes on Bittorrent would never have stolen a DVD from a store or climbed up a power pole to illegally tap into cable.

When it becomes trivial to 3d print gray goo (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gray_goo) I wonder if you'll sing the same tune to humanity's destruction or if you'd admit that there's a spectrum and there's some threshold past which a technology becomes condemnable. Because right now your statement basically implies there is no such threshold (since clearly the person you're replying to thinks podcast.ai is past it).

Re: Lex Fridman Interviews Richard Feynman

#23

Post by jasonlotito »

apetresc wrote: post #3
6c737133 wrote: post #2

this is fucked up manufacturing content from the voices/faces of prominent people that have died is no bueno fuck podcast.ai

In all earnestness - why? It's not like anyone would be fooled into thinking this was real. What's the harm?

> i hate Lex Friedman and Richard Feynnman

That's pretty harsh.

Re: Lex Fridman Interviews Richard Feynman

#24

Post by smt88 »

RobertDeNiro wrote: post #10

Is there any value to these? like its a cool tech demo, but they are mostly saying non sense.

I think the beginning and end of the value of these is as a tech demo. At this point in the lifecycle of the technology, I don't think anyone is trying to achieve novel, valuable content.

Re: Lex Fridman Interviews Richard Feynman

#25

Post by jahewson »

xsmasher wrote: post #12

I was interested when Feynman pushed back on the laziness of the opening question - seems like a very Feynman thing to do - so I was interested. The follow up question, though, snuck in a lie - "you went to UC Berkeley for two years." That property of these interviews seems dangerous, and likely to implant false factoids in people's heads.

Fun fact, factoids are always false.

Re: Lex Fridman Interviews Richard Feynman

#27

Post by Bootvis »

jasonlotito wrote: post #20

I think it's important that this makes it clear that this is fake. The title here is 100% a lie. At least, it should be "AI Generated Fake Lex Fridman interviews Fake Richard Feynman." Have some self-respect.

Clearly, they are not contemporaries so it’s obvious.

Re: Lex Fridman Interviews Richard Feynman

#28

Post by ravenstine »

jahewson wrote: post #25
xsmasher wrote: post #12

I was interested when Feynman pushed back on the laziness of the opening question - seems like a very Feynman thing to do - so I was interested. The follow up question, though, snuck in a lie - "you went to UC Berkeley for two years." That property of these interviews seems dangerous, and likely to implant false factoids in people's heads.

Fun fact, factoids are always false.

Necessarily? I'd assume a factoid has the potential to be either true or false.

Re: Lex Fridman Interviews Richard Feynman

#29

Post by subarctic »

Now that these deepfake interviews are getting posted regularly, they should have something in the title indicating that they are deepfakes / AI-generated. I thought this was an old interview with Richard Feynman that someone had found and posted, which would've been pretty cool, but instead it's just another one of these auto-generated interviews. (It being from podcast.ai was what gave it away since I saw the last one with Steve Jobs and Joe Rogan, but really it should be obvious from the title.)

Re: Lex Fridman Interviews Richard Feynman

#30

Post by hhmc »

ravenstine wrote: post #28
jahewson wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fun fact, factoids are always false.

Necessarily? I'd assume a factoid has the potential to be either true or false.

By some original definition of the word they are necessarily false. Usage seems to have shifted to ‘small fact’ though
Post reply on HN