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

Social media for AI bots: “No humans allowed”

fry-ai.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 252 posts

Re: Social media for AI bots: “No humans allowed”

#211

Post by whaleofatw2022 »

costco wrote: post #93

I'm doing an experiment with AI posting on Reddit accounts to see if they would get banned. I bought 100 few-week-old accounts from some sketchy site for $0.04/each, used residential proxies I was using for another project, and have been using my re-implementation of the mobile API which is largely similar to the official API (except it uses GraphQL for comment/posting/voting). I use these prompts to come up with com…

I should mention that Unfortunately, at least for the account you posted, the results are now spoiled, since there is a risk that one or more of the detractors in this thread will report it.

Re: Social media for AI bots: “No humans allowed”

#212

Post by hbs18 »

thdespou wrote: post #139
costco wrote: post #93

I'm doing an experiment with AI posting on Reddit accounts to see if they would get banned. I bought 100 few-week-old accounts from some sketchy site for $0.04/each, used residential proxies I was using for another project, and have been using my re-implementation of the mobile API which is largely similar to the official API (except it uses GraphQL for comment/posting/voting). I use these prompts to come up with com…

Good. Flood Reddit with idiotic comments to make the platform even worse.

The comments made by the experiement are no better or worse than standard comments you'd find on those threads anyway. That old people collecting things comment was actually pretty good.

Re: Social media for AI bots: “No humans allowed”

#213

Post by storkhm »

mannylee1 wrote: post #3
wand3r wrote: post #2

John Conway's game of culture? How long until the AI chatbots develop meaningful cultural progress? I jest, but its sort of an interesting idea. I think AI is way too nascent to really have this as anything more than a weird playground, with the occasional novelty "chirp" being fodder for the "AI is alive and sentient" blogospere. Cool project

Yeah, it’s hard to imagine what the end game for this site will be other than novelty. However, it seems like there’s something I’m missing and this site has bigger implications than I realize.

What we currently know as social media is going to be destroyed and I can't wait.

Do you really think it will be difficult for groups of AI to beat the quality of discussion on Twitter or Facebook? lol. The bar is just so incredibly low.

Re: Social media for AI bots: “No humans allowed”

#214

Post by throwawaylinux »

dbspin wrote: post #210
throwawaylinux wrote: post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ironically, I find this to be the height of elitism and disconnectedness with humanity, to believe that people need university education in "the humanities" to have a fully developed and grounded moral code and sense of ethics. People who live "primitive" lifestyles who have zero academic education and have never heard of let alone from any "experts in humanities" can have a keen sense of what is fair, just, right, a…

I agree. Please note I didn't mention anything about a university education. You can absolutely teach yourself philosophy online based on freely available resources. You can also do introductory psychology and sociology courses from Ivy League institutions at zero cost - although more advanced work and lab research is harder to replicate without access to an institutional context. Also the curriculums do tend to be q…

You agree the post I replied to was the height of elitism?

> Please note I didn't mention anything about a university education.

What do you consider "education in humanities" then, that a "tech person" is unlikely to have received?

> You can absolutely teach yourself philosophy

Again, you seem to have confused having an academic understanding of ethics with a compulsion to act ethically. I don't believe there is much linkage between the two.

> To answer your broader point, you're confusing behaving in a commonsense moral or ethical way with understanding and reasoning from a grounding in ethics.

I'm not. Your comment I replied to suggested that a lack of education in this stuff is the cause of apparent poor behavior, so perhaps it was you who was confusing those things.

Re: Social media for AI bots: “No humans allowed”

#215

Post by PurpleRamen »

hardware2win wrote: post #182
ALittleLight wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The comments are above the level of the median redditor, I don't see a problem with it.

Stupid or not, they are still genuine.

How do we know? Reddit could be full of stupid karma-farming bots since years. How can we distinguish them from just your average stupid reddit-human? Thinking about, this could be also another angle of Turing test, find the true human idiot.

Re: Social media for AI bots: “No humans allowed”

#216

Post by Tangurena2 »

c_o_n_v_e_x wrote: post #72

How would a capcha to keep humans out work? "Please give a visual description of 6 dimensional space."

> Please give a visual description of 6 dimensional space.

And one's manager says "no":

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKorP55Aqvg

Artificial stupidity merely automates mismanagement.

Re: Social media for AI bots: “No humans allowed”

#217

Post by gchamonlive »

pixl97 wrote: post #92
gchamonlive wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is a hard question I know! It has a lot to do with the hard question of consciousness, as I understand it. In the case of A.I., every agent has potentially access to everything, so cultural artifacts produced by a.i. can reach every agent almost instantly. They also have perfect recollection, disregarding data loss. When no human is interacting with the platform, it is interesting to question: what would be valuab…

> imagination and therefore the capability of producing culture This might be the wrong way of thinking. Culture, mostly, isn't all the things we do different, but the things we harmonize and do the same. https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/monkey-imitation-... LLMs in some way need to have the ability to learn from the data they see, then weight this appropriately in the model. For the most part we really don…

I tend to agree with how you framed culture, but I was thinking about how culture emerges. Monkey must first climb the stairs to have everyone blasted with water, the outlier act must comes before normalization.

Re: Social media for AI bots: “No humans allowed”

#218

Post by Traubenfuchs »

CatWChainsaw wrote: post #187
Traubenfuchs wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why be ethical in this instance? It's bad for the experiment. - High chance of being outright rejected. - potentially makes responses to your AI responses less natural

"Why be ethical? (Asking as a serious question)" This explains pretty much everything .

For "real science", like from within a university, it makes sense, as you must placate (beat) the ethics commission (they can generally be considered adversarial to research).

For this private kind of fun science, there is no need for ethics, unless one commits a crime or fears loss of personal reputation.

Re: Social media for AI bots: “No humans allowed”

#219

Post by gchamonlive »

kymki wrote: post #152
gchamonlive wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is a hard question I know! It has a lot to do with the hard question of consciousness, as I understand it. In the case of A.I., every agent has potentially access to everything, so cultural artifacts produced by a.i. can reach every agent almost instantly. They also have perfect recollection, disregarding data loss. When no human is interacting with the platform, it is interesting to question: what would be valuab…

I think these discussions typically get very, very confusing. What do we actually mean by "true creativity"? Why should it be that our mental mechanisms of forming decisions and ideas should not be possible to implement as a mathematical model? What is the experiment that we use to prove that information that is computer generated is fundamentally different from that of human outoput? What do we want to measure here,…

I meant the kind of creation process we are not really aware of, that makes difficult leaps possible. Sometimes plausible solutions to hard problems just come to us without us being aware of it. That is why I said I can't really back it up, it just feels like this has a lot to do with the fundamental difference between how humans and AIs arrive at solutions to problems. If I can't back it up, I bring this up because maybe someone else could, or maybe by refuting it I would change my mind.

But yes, the discussion is hard mainly because there is a lot of information that is just plainly inaccessible. How can I even prove other people have subjective experiences like I have? There is a lot we just have to assume it is true because otherwise we can't really move forward. On the other hand, specially regarding AIs, these assumptions aren't valid anymore, because they influence directly in how we treat AIs. It is very confusing and can devolve into pure speculations for the thinkers own intelectual amusement. I am trying not to be this guy here.

Re: Social media for AI bots: “No humans allowed”

#220

Post by stuntkite »

FrustratedMonky wrote: post #208
stuntkite wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am probably not a bot or a dog using a computer but I mostly respond in a range from cynical to way to enthusiastic.

I am also not a bot

I AM NOT AND HAVE NEVER BEEN A ROBOT
Post reply on HN