Live data from Hacker News

AI Crap

drewdevault.com

211–220 of 260 posts

Re: AI Crap

#211
post #126

The rush to just shit on everything is so tiresome. Why write this article other than to to smugly say "told you so" in the cases where you turn out right. It is a zero risk take. Looking at the advances in AI (Chess, Go, Protein Folding, MidJourney, ChatGPT) and your takeaway being "Humans will use this in bad ways" shows a ferocious lack of imagination. I notice a desperate, but failing, attempt to lump the advance…

> The rush to just shit on everything is so tiresome.

I also get that feeling. It seems it is now fashionable to take down anything that might change things (I'm not saying that all change is good). Change resistance is something that always existed and we are already used to, but somehow this looks a bit different, more ideological.

Re: AI Crap

#212
post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Unfortunately, I suspect we will get a two-tiered system, where the "middle class" (whether that's disappearing is another question) can afford human content/human support/etc, and the working class are forced to endure poor experiences with AI generated content and so on I’m imagining world where companies like Netflix and Spotify introduce dirt-cheap subscription tiers that are populate with AI generated content,…

Why would the poor not be able to afford human generated content? Copying human generated context costs basically nothing, so the marginal cost of letting the poor view it is basically nothing.

Because you have to pay those humans their royalties when their content is consumed.

Re: AI Crap

#213
post #4

I am another AI pessimist. Can I please ask the optimists to list the good things LLMs can do for humanity as a whole ? I don't mean banal stuff like Copilot, which is a double-edged sword that might be used against junior developers. I mean world-changing benefits, one step closer to the techno-utopia. Because on paper, the net benefits vs net negatives, for me and other AI pessimists like the author, are not worth…

Empower artists to make far more complex works that they would never have been able to do alone before.

One artist might be able to produce a complete animated movie controlling all aspects.

Re: AI Crap

#214
post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Accelerate education at unprecedented levels (if we can figure out how to integrate LLMs into the education system). To this day I find myself doing a double take every time I'm about to ask ChatGPT to produce a ludicrous amount of output, because it would simply not be reasonable to ask that of some random person. But with LLMs you can do that, over and over again and it will comply every time. How great is it that…

On "accelerate education" - it's often a bad teacher especially on higher level subjects . I've asked it to summarise research for me using the Bing GPT4 model and it would frequently come to conclusions that couldn't be corroborated in the source material, that were even contradictory across different chat sessions and even generate citation links that were totally irrelevant and incorrect, and then try to tell me t…

That has not been my experience with ChatGPT 4. If I were to ask it about some specialized info about quantum field theory or superconductor tech, I'm sure it would send back nonsense fairly frequently. But if I ask it to explain the difference between median, mean and average, or ask for examples on an architectural pattern, it's seldom incorrect.

Re: AI Crap

#215
post #114

Just like in Rifters trilogy by Peter Watts, Internet will become unusable thanks to AI-driven spam, phishing, SEO, and other junk content.

Is that really because of the AI, or because of humans controlling them?

We already have incredible levels of spam, phishing, junk SEO content. Created from humans and scripts driven by humans.

Re: AI Crap

#216
post #214

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On "accelerate education" - it's often a bad teacher especially on higher level subjects . I've asked it to summarise research for me using the Bing GPT4 model and it would frequently come to conclusions that couldn't be corroborated in the source material, that were even contradictory across different chat sessions and even generate citation links that were totally irrelevant and incorrect, and then try to tell me t…

That has not been my experience with ChatGPT 4. If I were to ask it about some specialized info about quantum field theory or superconductor tech, I'm sure it would send back nonsense fairly frequently. But if I ask it to explain the difference between median, mean and average, or ask for examples on an architectural pattern, it's seldom incorrect.

If you prompt directly about the subject it can be fine but it veers into BS territory more often if you try to get it to synthesise information meaning it's less good with applied examples that are given to it by the user. Not always but the error potential is definitely higher.

The problem then I think is that this means that students will have to prompt "on rails" to get reliable answers. The most curious students who want to stretch their knowledge are likely to cause it to generate falsehoods which are presented confidently and convincingly.

Re: AI Crap

#217
post #68
post #4

I am another AI pessimist. Can I please ask the optimists to list the good things LLMs can do for humanity as a whole ? I don't mean banal stuff like Copilot, which is a double-edged sword that might be used against junior developers. I mean world-changing benefits, one step closer to the techno-utopia. Because on paper, the net benefits vs net negatives, for me and other AI pessimists like the author, are not worth…

Accelerate education at unprecedented levels (if we can figure out how to integrate LLMs into the education system). To this day I find myself doing a double take every time I'm about to ask ChatGPT to produce a ludicrous amount of output, because it would simply not be reasonable to ask that of some random person. But with LLMs you can do that, over and over again and it will comply every time. How great is it that…

>Accelerate education at unprecedented levels (if we can figure out how to integrate LLMs into the education system).

More likely we'll replace poor people's teachers with ChatGPT and whoever has more cash affords actual teachers. This is so real that we're experiencing this >today<, in a different scale with private schools and distance learning in countries such as Brasil where there are projects to reduce schools and/or move some of them to use distance learning.

Re: AI Crap

#218
post #88

> AI companies will continue to generate waste and CO2 emissions at a huge scale as they aggressively scrape all internet content they can find, externalizing costs onto the world’s digital infrastructure, and feed their hoard into GPU farms to generate their models. They might keep humans in the loop to help with tagging content, seeking out the cheapest markets with the weakest labor laws to build human sweatshops…

What a load of snide hogwash. First of all, how are LLMs snake oil? There is actual usefulness to be had. And I can run inference on my laptop, transferring capabilities to smaller models is a thing, quantization is a thing, optimization is a thing. And, DL has been feasible for barely a decade, LLMs for a few years. Are you talking about crypto by any chance?

> What a load of snide hogwash. First of all, how are LLMs snake oil? There is actual usefulness to be had.

It is an energy wasting snake-oil burning the planet. [0] [1] Especially when they confidently hallucinate without any transparent reasoning or explanation other than the regurgitation that it has been trained to do, or more accurately they are stochastic parrots.

The issue is fundamental to LLMs and deep learning and researchers still don't know why other than tweaking parameters and fine tuning / re-training it with GPUs still incinerating the planet with no viable alternative to such wasteful methods.

> And I can run inference on my laptop, transferring capabilities to smaller models is a thing, quantization is a thing, optimization is a thing.

We are talking worst case for inference not 'smaller models' which still need to be trained or fine-tuned to exist in the first place and for improvements. For the so-called 'serious' cloud-based LLMs, they need to continuously serve every inference and that requires a fleet of GPUs to serve lots of users as the parameter count of the model gets larger.

> And, DL has been feasible for barely a decade, LLMs for a few years.

Neural networks which are fundamental to LLMs have been around for decades and are still unexplainable black boxes which are incapable of transparent reasoning other than regurgitating responses that it was trained on. Unacceptable and useless for a wave of use-cases that require explainability.

> Are you talking about crypto by any chance?

Crypto already has viable alternatives to its energy wasting problem [2] available today right now. Deep Learning still does not.

[0] https://gizmodo.com/chatgpt-ai-water-185000-gallons-training...

[1] https://www.independent.co.uk/tech/chatgpt-data-centre-water...

[2] https://consensys.net/blog/press-release/ethereum-blockchain...

Re: AI Crap

#219
post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You seem to be bothered by the idea that you may not be perfectly moral/ethical. You're a good person, therefore everything you do is by definition moral/ethical? It seems as if you're attaching the same connotations to morality/ethics as you would to legality. If something is not perfectly moral/ethical, it doesn't mean you should never do it. We over indulge, we waste electricity and water, we drive unnecessarily b…

>It's not moral or ethical, but it doesn't make you a bad person. When it's done en-masse, is encouraged, and corporations monetize it, is when it starts becoming a problem. >If something is not perfectly moral/ethical, it doesn't mean you should never do it. i think that when emissions are brought up in an argument, it's not usually this more nuanced take (that I also take some issue with, by the way, as it's imposs…

> it's impossible to do anything not en masse at 8b population

you are missing some simple arithmetic here. yes, x times y can get arbitrarily big if x does (and y is non-negative), but then changes in y would just have even more of an impact. take x to be population and y to be emission per person and you should see your mistake.

Re: AI Crap

#220
I'm not sure if anyone should take the guy seriously. For a person who has "I don't want to talk about AI" in his profile, and banning everyone who dares to have a different opinion, he sure talks about AI a lot.
Post reply on HN