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

The original URL for this prediction will no longer be available in 11 years (2011)

longbets.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 105 posts

Re: The original URL for this prediction will no longer be available in 11 years (2011)

#21

Post by tredre3 »

hypfer wrote: post #15
EGreg wrote: post #5

It's all a matter of whether someone is willing to pay for the hosting. Which is not, in my opinion, how things should be hosted on the Web. Freenet had a different approach, even back in the early days (two decades ago). I interviewed Ian Clarke about it https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JWrRqUkJpMQ I wrote about it for years: https://community.intercoin.app/t/who-pays-for-storage-nfts-... And recently I built Safeclo…

On HN, a TLDR would be helpful, because just clicking your links would potentially mean falling for shilling of ones own side-hustle. I bet there's complexity to the topic, but I am sure you could put it into a few words instead of just leaving a hook for others to click on.

I know nothing of Safecloud, but freenet failed for a very valid reasons:

1. Data retention isn't infinite. If the source disappears from the network, peers will prune it shortly. This is exponentially true in our multimedia-heavy world.

2. Despite 1, if you actually want to delete something you published, you can't. Absolutists will see this as a good thing. Normal people will see this as a problem.

3. Peer-to-peer doesn't work in a mobile-first world, and not enough people will host nodes as a hobby. If all website publishers/hosters have to host a node, then we're just back to the current model but with extra steps.

Re: The original URL for this prediction will no longer be available in 11 years (2011)

#22

Post by DonHopkins »

vvoyer wrote: post #6

Amazing that Disqus comments are still live for this page. More impressive even than the website itself being live.

I'm grateful the comments are still there, since they reminded me to get back in touch with my old friend Craig Hubley!

Re: The original URL for this prediction will no longer be available in 11 years (2011)

#23

Post by sublinear »

CSMastermind wrote: post #18

It's worth noting that some prediction URLs, for instance: https://longbets.org/6/ are offline. The original long bet was whether or not computers could pass the turing test by 2029: https://longbets.org/1/ You'd think that LLMs fulfill this, but I do wonder if a clever human could still discern between them given their particularities. https://longbets.org/9/ is another interesting one depending on whether you think…

> You'd think that LLMs fulfill this, but I do wonder if a clever human could still discern between them given their particularities.

You don't even have to be that clever. We've all tried using it for work. They fail.

In the first place, the Turing test was always a loosely defined thought experiment. I suppose it's still serving that purpose, but at least half of HN takes it way too seriously. It's absolutely not proof of endorsed by Alan Turing himself.

Re: The original URL for this prediction will no longer be available in 11 years (2011)

#27

Post by bblb »

tredre3 wrote: post #21
hypfer wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On HN, a TLDR would be helpful, because just clicking your links would potentially mean falling for shilling of ones own side-hustle. I bet there's complexity to the topic, but I am sure you could put it into a few words instead of just leaving a hook for others to click on.

I know nothing of Safecloud, but freenet failed for a very valid reasons: 1. Data retention isn't infinite. If the source disappears from the network, peers will prune it shortly. This is exponentially true in our multimedia-heavy world. 2. Despite 1, if you actually want to delete something you published, you can't. Absolutists will see this as a good thing. Normal people will see this as a problem. 3. Peer-to-peer…

Closed-garden mobile-first tech feudalism lobotimized the Internet. I remember trying out the Freenets, I2Ps, and whatnot in the 90's. Too cumbersome nerdy tools to use for anything actually worthwhile. It was born in the idealized world village of the 90's Internet. Maybe real life doesn't work like that, and the lobotimized centralized tech will eventually win.

Re: The original URL for this prediction will no longer be available in 11 years (2011)

#28

Post by frotaur »

sublinear wrote: post #23
CSMastermind wrote: post #18

It's worth noting that some prediction URLs, for instance: https://longbets.org/6/ are offline. The original long bet was whether or not computers could pass the turing test by 2029: https://longbets.org/1/ You'd think that LLMs fulfill this, but I do wonder if a clever human could still discern between them given their particularities. https://longbets.org/9/ is another interesting one depending on whether you think…

> You'd think that LLMs fulfill this, but I do wonder if a clever human could still discern between them given their particularities. You don't even have to be that clever. We've all tried using it for work. They fail. In the first place, the Turing test was always a loosely defined thought experiment. I suppose it's still serving that purpose, but at least half of HN takes it way too seriously. It's absolutely not p…

I think if you trained an LLM specifically for the purpose of passing the Turing test (instead of being helpful, harmful, and so on), its likely it would pass it.

You would have to train it/finetune it on a couple hundred of 'humans chatting in the context of a Turing test'.

Re: The original URL for this prediction will no longer be available in 11 years (2011)

#29

Post by nxpnsv »

sublinear wrote: post #23
CSMastermind wrote: post #18

It's worth noting that some prediction URLs, for instance: https://longbets.org/6/ are offline. The original long bet was whether or not computers could pass the turing test by 2029: https://longbets.org/1/ You'd think that LLMs fulfill this, but I do wonder if a clever human could still discern between them given their particularities. https://longbets.org/9/ is another interesting one depending on whether you think…

> You'd think that LLMs fulfill this, but I do wonder if a clever human could still discern between them given their particularities. You don't even have to be that clever. We've all tried using it for work. They fail. In the first place, the Turing test was always a loosely defined thought experiment. I suppose it's still serving that purpose, but at least half of HN takes it way too seriously. It's absolutely not p…

Mannerisms aside, they are easy to spot from having inhuman amounts of trivia knowledge

Re: The original URL for this prediction will no longer be available in 11 years (2011)

#30

Post by andai »

CSMastermind wrote: post #18

It's worth noting that some prediction URLs, for instance: https://longbets.org/6/ are offline. The original long bet was whether or not computers could pass the turing test by 2029: https://longbets.org/1/ You'd think that LLMs fulfill this, but I do wonder if a clever human could still discern between them given their particularities. https://longbets.org/9/ is another interesting one depending on whether you think…

There was a paper a while ago, where they found a strategy for GPT beating humans on the Turing test 2/3rds of the time.

They just prompted it to talk the way a 13 year old girl texts.

(Also they prompted it to pretend not to know anything about anything.)

Post reply on HN