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

Clankers Die on Christmas

remyhax.xyz

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 268 posts

Re: Clankers Die on Christmas

#251

Post by epiccoleman »

goopypoop wrote: post #171
epiccoleman wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I think that asking people to treat ChatGPT with "kindness and respect" is patently embarrassing. We don't ask people to be nice to their phone's autocorrect, or to Siri, or to the forks in their silverware drawer, because that's stupid. > ChatGPT deserves no more or less empathy than a fork does. I agree completely that ChatGPT deserves zero empathy. It can't feel, it can't care, it can't be hurt by your rudeness.…

do you also beg your toilet to flush?

if the primary mode of interaction with my toilet was conversational, then yeah, i'd probably be polite to the toilet. i might even feel a genuine sense of gratitude since it does provide a highly useful service.

Re: Clankers Die on Christmas

#252

Post by epiccoleman »

goopypoop wrote: post #237
duggan wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If it could hold a conversation I might. I also believe AI is a tool, but I'm sympathetic to the idea that, due to some facet of human psychology, being "rude" might train me to be less respectful in other interactions. Ergo, I might be more likely to treat you like a toilet.

Any "conversation" with a machine is dehumanizing. Are you really in danger of forgetting the humanity of strangers because you didn't anthropomorphize a text generator? If so, I don't think etiquette is the answer

the thing is, though, that the text generator self-anthropomorphizes.

perhaps if an LLM were trained to be less conversational and more robotic, i would feel less like being polite to it. i never catch myself typing "thanks" to my shell for returning an `ls`.

Re: Clankers Die on Christmas

#253

Post by cschep »

cschep wrote: post #25
imchillyb wrote: post #23

Seems as it would be easier to slip in some anti-training, and have the AIs screw systems up so badly that there is a 'recall' of all the current models. The LLMs and their corresponding systems crawl the web constantly. So, poison the well. Good data behind paywalls and credentialing and the poison pill open and free. Seems like it'd be worth a try anyway.

Is this the equivalent to the humans nuking the sky to fight the robots in the Matrix? I don't think that worked.

to the replies that we shouldn't use fiction to aid decision making -- yes of course! how rational. how reasonable.

.. but perhaps can we access deep wisdom by paying attention the recurring themes of myths?

.. and perhaps does "The Matrix" access any of these themes?

(yes and yes!)

Re: Clankers Die on Christmas

#254

Post by m463 »

newfocogi wrote: post #2

For others who, like me, didn't know what "clankers" are: it appears it's a popular derogatory term for robots or AI, arising from the Star Wars universe where clone troopers used the term as a derogatory term for droids.

well, actually:

The word clanker has been previously used in science fiction literature, first appearing in a 1958 article by William Tenn in which he uses it to describe robots from science fiction films like Metropolis.[2]

He actually taught science fiction and had lots of interesting stories of the classic era of scifi, like BEM's - a bug-eyed-monster, arms wrapped around a woman in s "brass brassiere".

hmmm.. which now I realize explains "the flat eyed monster"...

https://www.baen.com/Chapters/9781476780986/9781476780986___...

Re: Clankers Die on Christmas

#255

Post by taneq »

ForHackernews wrote: post #217
taneq wrote: post #176

Does anyone else find it just a little disturbing how hard a certain subset of the population is leaning into this? Like they've finally found a group of people that they're allowed to hate. And let's be clear here, they're personifying this tech. Nobody bothers to hate a word processor or a 3D printer.

They're not people. You're allowed to hate spyware, spamware, MS Word and PC LOAD LETTER. You absolutely should hate technology that makes your life worse.

That's literally my point, though. Maybe I should have worded it better. You 'hate' them, sure, but in a frustrated way, the way you hate a thing.

These people seem to hate AI the way you'd despise a person.

Re: Clankers Die on Christmas

#256

Post by goopypoop »

epiccoleman wrote: post #252
goopypoop wrote: post #237

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Any "conversation" with a machine is dehumanizing. Are you really in danger of forgetting the humanity of strangers because you didn't anthropomorphize a text generator? If so, I don't think etiquette is the answer

the thing is, though, that the text generator self-anthropomorphizes . perhaps if an LLM were trained to be less conversational and more robotic, i would feel less like being polite to it. i never catch myself typing "thanks" to my shell for returning an `ls`.

alias 'thanks'="echo You\'re welcome!"

Re: Clankers Die on Christmas

#257

Post by goopypoop »

epiccoleman wrote: post #252
goopypoop wrote: post #237

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Any "conversation" with a machine is dehumanizing. Are you really in danger of forgetting the humanity of strangers because you didn't anthropomorphize a text generator? If so, I don't think etiquette is the answer

the thing is, though, that the text generator self-anthropomorphizes . perhaps if an LLM were trained to be less conversational and more robotic, i would feel less like being polite to it. i never catch myself typing "thanks" to my shell for returning an `ls`.

> the thing is, though, that the text generator self-anthropomorphizes.

and that is why it must die!

Re: Clankers Die on Christmas

#258

Post by curtisblaine »

sidrag22 wrote: post #189
curtisblaine wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Moral? They're... programs

seemed like a discussion point in this thread, didnt really care to engage with it, i think it was more about human desire to create a derogatory term to describe something they dislike more so than an accusation of being immoral by using the term. but again, wasnt something i was interested in engaging with much

> human desire to create a derogatory term to describe something they dislike

Isn't it...expected, calling something you don't like in a derogatory way?

Re: Clankers Die on Christmas

#259

Post by Cthulhu_ »

taneq wrote: post #176

Does anyone else find it just a little disturbing how hard a certain subset of the population is leaning into this? Like they've finally found a group of people that they're allowed to hate. And let's be clear here, they're personifying this tech. Nobody bothers to hate a word processor or a 3D printer.

Part of it is irony / memes / for teh lulz though. But then, a lot of alt-right started off as irony / memes / for teh lulz.
Post reply on HN