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

I Have Blocked OpenAI

gavinhoward.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 57 posts

Re: I Have Blocked OpenAI

#21

Post by gremlinsinc »

Racing0461 wrote: post #2

unpopular opinion: llm responses being wrong is still valuable to me since it gives me a better jumping off point to exploring than nothing at all. especially with something like coding that can easily be back-propagated due to something not compiling/not working as intended. could be harmful in other areas tho.

yeah, if the LLM gives me 2 truths that are beyond the documentation, like an edge case or maybe an example in a better describes way for me to grok, and one false thing, usually the false thing is so bad i can tell it's false or it's truthy but the value from the two truths exceeds the negative value of the falsehood.

Generally speaking though you can also cut back on hallucination by asking for a source from a second LLM or using good retrospections and adding system messages to ensure if it doesn't know an answer to say so and not make one up.

Really, I think hallucination is the wrong word bullshitting or gaslighting might be better. You're asking it something and it thinks you want an answer any answer so if it doesn't know it makes it up. Similar to people who confess to crimes they didn't do because of distressful interrogation tactics.

Re: I Have Blocked OpenAI

#22

Post by gavinhoward »

circuit10 wrote: post #18
gavinhoward wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Author here. My docs will include tutorial links at the top, and those tutorials will focus on accomplishing common tasks. I believe that's a good jumping off point.

You can’t realistically cover every use case. With an LLM you can say something like “Make me a program that sets up an SDL window with the title ABCD that has a 396x224 RGB565 framebuffer and moves around a red square using the WASD keys by using a loop to fill in pixels in that framebuffer and then quits when it reaches the right edge of the screen” and it has a reasonable chance of making something that works or a…

I would bet good money that, as a use case becomes more niche, an LLM's output becomes more wrong. If that's true, your assertion would be wrong.

Re: I Have Blocked OpenAI

#23

Post by circuit10 »

gavinhoward wrote: post #9
b800h wrote: post #5

I bet information about his software is around elsewhere, and now ChatGPT will make up even more. I don't know how this is fixed. Structured queryable data, I guess.

Author here. You are correct, but if I demonstrate that I have done what I could to deny OpenAI access, and they still have it in their model, then I probably have more legal recourse against them.

I don’t think you have any legal recourse, even if training isn’t considered fair use (which it seems to be) I don’t think you can copyright having knowledge of how to use a library or piece of software (maybe the specific way you write the documentation is but it will infer it from other sources instead)

Re: I Have Blocked OpenAI

#24

Post by input_sh »

> Despite the volume of documentation, my documentation would still be just a tiny blip in the amount of information in the LLM, and it will still pull in information from elsewhere to answer questions.

I sympathise. I've recently discovered that apparently I have enough Internet clout that ChatGPT knows about me. As in I can carefully construct a prompt and it will unmistakably reference me in particular. Don't even need to provide my name in the prompt.

Except, every fucking detail of what it "knows" about me is 100% false, and there's nothing I can do to correct it. I'm from a wrong country, I did things in my career that I absolutely didn't, etc.

Needless to say, I also blocked its crawler.

Re: I Have Blocked OpenAI

#25

Post by RecycledEle »

We are all myopic in our own ways.

The guy who posted about blocking OpenAI so they will not answer questions about his software wrong (meaning not completely) ignores that his documentation is inaccessible to many less technically literate people. LLM AIs help bridge the gap to get newbies using software before they can understand the manuals.

Re: I Have Blocked OpenAI

#26

Post by gavinhoward »

RecycledEle wrote: post #25

We are all myopic in our own ways. The guy who posted about blocking OpenAI so they will not answer questions about his software wrong (meaning not completely) ignores that his documentation is inaccessible to many less technically literate people. LLM AIs help bridge the gap to get newbies using software before they can understand the manuals.

How do you know my docs are inaccessible to less technically literate people?

Re: I Have Blocked OpenAI

#27

Post by circuit10 »

gavinhoward wrote: post #20
Cantinflas wrote: post #16

> But here’s the problem: it will answer them wrong. There is no way to know that, and even if it ends up being true, blocking openai will likely make the problem worse, e.g. the ai answers will be worse without access to the documentation.

But if people come to me with problems, I can give them a link to that post and say, "GPTx does not know my stuff. You will want to read the docs yourself."

You could suggest that anyway without intentionally making it even worse at it (though honestly I don’t think this will have any effect anyway)

Re: I Have Blocked OpenAI

#28

Post by gavinhoward »

circuit10 wrote: post #27
gavinhoward wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But if people come to me with problems, I can give them a link to that post and say, "GPTx does not know my stuff. You will want to read the docs yourself."

You could suggest that anyway without intentionally making it even worse at it (though honestly I don’t think this will have any effect anyway)

I could, but with so many people trusting GPTx too much, I suspect that they would not come to me with questions, but bug reports and insist that my software has the bug even if it does not.

By saying that GPTx just doesn't know my stuff, it would be easier to tell them to go away.

Re: I Have Blocked OpenAI

#29

Post by circuit10 »

gavinhoward wrote: post #22
circuit10 wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can’t realistically cover every use case. With an LLM you can say something like “Make me a program that sets up an SDL window with the title ABCD that has a 396x224 RGB565 framebuffer and moves around a red square using the WASD keys by using a loop to fill in pixels in that framebuffer and then quits when it reaches the right edge of the screen” and it has a reasonable chance of making something that works or a…

I would bet good money that, as a use case becomes more niche, an LLM's output becomes more wrong. If that's true, your assertion would be wrong.

It does become more wrong, yes, but blocking it isn’t going to help it get any better. The idea that everything an LLM does can be replaced by documentation isn’t true

Re: I Have Blocked OpenAI

#30

Post by gremlinsinc »

gavinhoward wrote: post #9
b800h wrote: post #5

I bet information about his software is around elsewhere, and now ChatGPT will make up even more. I don't know how this is fixed. Structured queryable data, I guess.

Author here. You are correct, but if I demonstrate that I have done what I could to deny OpenAI access, and they still have it in their model, then I probably have more legal recourse against them.

But what legal recourse? chatGPT could be considered a search engine, and technically scraping public facing sites without a login is perfectly allowed and legal. The best you'd be able to do is a dmca request, I'm not sure how they'd comply with that though. I've seen dmca requests in Google, when someone's work is being offered free without their permission. I'm guessing this would be the same sort of situation.

I wonder if they can selectively block or remove specific content from the LLM. Personally I think it's a fools folly to even try.

AI chat is the new interface to search, I use ai powered search engines for 90 percent of searches. sometimes I still go to the source website so there's still a chance of search engines bringing revenue.

Personally I think there should be a way for them to reward sites in a medium like program where views or uses as a resource are points for a share of the revenue for the month or something.

Post reply on HN