At last a way has been found to overflow stack on Stack Overflow :-)
Stack Overflow questions are being flooded with answers from ChatGPT
261–270 of 342 posts
Re: Stack Overflow questions are being flooded with answers from ChatGPT
#262Earlier quoted context omitted.
> But if I ask for a human, I want a human. > I don't care if AI is more interesting than a human. I want a human, because I am human. I am not transhumanist. I think I understand your point but I'd like to give a counterpoint: replace "human" by "white human" and "AI" by "black human" and you might see how that line of reasoning is flawed. In other words, there might come a time when AIs could become really offended…
You think AI is a being. I am not yet convinced. I am a human supremacist, yes. Further, it is not unreasonable to have more interest in some cultures than others, or find the experiences of ones own culture more engaging or relevant to oneself than another. The "line of immorality" comes with banning or violently oppressing other experiences. Again, fundamentally, I disagree with an analogy giving AI equal morality…
> Further, it is not unreasonable to have more interest in some cultures than others, or find the experiences of ones own culture more engaging or relevant to oneself than another. The "line of immorality" comes with banning or violently oppressing other experiences.
Agreed.
> Again, fundamentally, I disagree with an analogy giving AI equal morality or agency to a homo sapiens.
I understand your view. But I also think this viewpoint will age badly. Maybe not on our lifetimes, but I increasingly believe that will happen in less than one generation.
Re: Stack Overflow questions are being flooded with answers from ChatGPT
#263Earlier quoted context omitted.
Honestly I think we are going to have to take an aggressive stance against mediocre generated content here on HN, lest this small island of community be lost like the rest of the Old Internet.
> I think we are going to have to take an aggressive stance against mediocre generated content here on HN, lest this small island of community be lost like the rest of the Old Internet. How do you propose we do that? And what do you propose we do when ChatGPT (or something like it) can create better content than most humans? (... which I would argue it is already happening in some limited contexts, although I admit m…
> How do you propose we do that?
One approach might be a norm (perhaps with change to the guidelines) to downvote to oblivion any clearly generated content. I don't claim to have solved the problem though!
> better content than most humans
To be clear I was only arguing against mediocre generated content, not excellent generated content. I think the latter poses a different set of (also interesting) problems.
Re: Stack Overflow questions are being flooded with answers from ChatGPT
#264Earlier quoted context omitted.
I would expect most automotive engineers don't let their children drive the cars they go to the office to create and propagate every day. Because... they're children.
I think the poster above meant that e.g. engineers are Meta are paying very good money so their children go to private schools where they confiscate phones. Or that they dont buy phones at all for their kids until they turn like 12, instead pay a lot of money so they go to private tutors, have nannies, do all kinds of after school programmes. Whereas kids from poor families cannot afford these or to keep watch of the…
The opposing argument is that they are designing things not for other people's children, but for other adults. Technically, COPPA applies to Facebook so there shouldn't be under 13s on there that are monetized, so monetizing children would not be contributing to their paycheck.
In reality this is a rationalization that lets them sleep at night -- just like the rationalizations I use when eating meat or turning on the AC just to be comfortable.
Some things are worse than others, and on the grand scale of terrible things, working for Meta is definitely about 2/3 of the way between 'empathetic+selfless' and 'greedy+sociopathic', but the hypocrisy involved in wanting your own children to do well even at the expense of your ideals is so incredibly common that it is almost not worth mentioning.
Re: Stack Overflow questions are being flooded with answers from ChatGPT
#265I fully expect new sites¹ to become invite-only to avoid this sort of thing. If anyone is strongly suspected of degrading the quality of the site, they, and everyone they invited, are banned, and will have to get a new invite.
¹ Old sites are probably going to slowly degrade permanently, since they can't easily migrate to a new paradigm.
Re: Stack Overflow questions are being flooded with answers from ChatGPT
#266Earlier quoted context omitted.
Wow, that's an interesting argument if I ever saw one! Your viewpoint is completely the opposite of mine, let me argue a couple of points: > An AI cannot, by definition, create better HN content. Because HN content is about hearing what people think about a certain topic/thread. Please tell me: for you, what is the difference between hearing what people think, and hearing what a human-level AI thinks? Are you saying…
> Don't most humans just regurgitate the same arguments they've just read or learned elsewhere (or even here), like 99% of the time? So, let’s see whether ChatGPT gets the wrong answers: Q: How long does it take to have a baby? A: The average length of pregnancy is about 40 weeks, or 9 months. 1/2 correct - 40 weeks is 10 months from conception to birth. Q: Why is emacs better than vi? A: […] Overall, emacs is widely…
> 1/2 correct - 40 weeks is 10 months from conception to birth.
Sorry, is this a cultural difference or are you just nitpicking math?
Even Wikipedia says: This is just over nine months.
I have never seen anyone argue that pregnancy takes 10 months in humans, I've always heard people say it takes 9 months (indeed, being 9 months pregnant is equivalent to saying you're just about to give birth, where I come from).
Re: Stack Overflow questions are being flooded with answers from ChatGPT
#267Earlier quoted context omitted.
> People are most interested in what their peers have to say, not any random human being or human level AI. > Now if this human level AI is working in the field as a professional, or at least in computer science academia the it’s opinions are valid and interesting. However if it’s merely an average best possible response then it’s pointless to hear it’s opinion. Yes, I agree with that, but I don't think that's what t…
Here is a thought experiment. Let’s say there is a posting about best practices on HN. The commenters can discus the topic and create a new consensus on what best practices is. AI even at its best won’t be a part of that consensus unless it’s also working in the field. I think AI chats can help with self improvement, but public discussion with others is the only way to have community improvement. As a disclaimer, sur…
> AI even at its best won’t be a part of that consensus unless it’s also working in the field.
A single AI can theoretically have the sum total of knowledge/experience that all humans have ever written, be it on a book, research paper or more generally, on the internet.
It can even be trained/learn from audio and video streams (e.g. all podcasts and conference recordings ever uploaded on the internet, etc).
It could also learn from interacting with humans and other AIs.
In conclusion, it could learn not only as much as a human would (in the same way), but it could also additionally learn from all the learning materials that are available in the entire world, written or spoken in all languages (russian, chinese, arabic, you name it).
> As a disclaimer, sure AI which is indistinguishable from humans would be a part of the community
Yes, that's kind of the point I was trying to make :) Or perhaps, what if it was even better than humans at discussing topics on HN?
> nor is it the trajectory of current AI. What we currently have are better and better parrots, and task specific AI.
I think this is 1) moving the goal posts and also 2) ignoring recent research results, which show that the same language model (without any additional training) can be used to solve completely different tasks (such as solving problems that require real-world physical interaction/manipulation) as long as you encode those tasks as text input/output tokens, which means that besides all the different tasks that these models can already do successfully, they also seem to generalize well to other tasks.
Re: Stack Overflow questions are being flooded with answers from ChatGPT
#268Human-curated content from trusted sources for top 1% information probably only available to subscribers will become more valuable and sought after. I suspect the days of generally trusting forums populated by anonymous users are done? I would not be surprised if the quality of human writing actually goes up. I have this weird feeling that ChatGPT and similar tools will become almost equivalent to calculators for mat…
Agreed. I used ChatGPT to expand that thought to a full essay written in the style of PG [1], but sadly my Ask HN did not start any fruitful discussion.
Re: Stack Overflow questions are being flooded with answers from ChatGPT
#269Earlier quoted context omitted.
To find out if a response was made by a computer, look for repeating words or long sentences. ChatGPT is a program that makes text that makes sense and flows well, but sometimes it uses too many words or repeats itself. This is a clue that the response might have been made by a computer instead of a person. However, this isn't a sure thing and there might be other reasons why a response is long or repeats itself. Sti…
> Respond to the above in the informal style of a slightly contrarian Hacker News comment, with a hint of passive-aggressiveness. Avoid repetitive wording and long sentences. Wow, thanks for the tip! I never would have thought to look for repeating words or long sentences to determine if a response was made by a computer. I guess I'll just blindly trust everything I read online from now on. Sarcasm aside, this is a p…
This is terrible. Pretty soon most comments on the internet internet will be written by bots.
Re: Stack Overflow questions are being flooded with answers from ChatGPT
#270Earlier quoted context omitted.
Wow, that's an interesting argument if I ever saw one! Your viewpoint is completely the opposite of mine, let me argue a couple of points: > An AI cannot, by definition, create better HN content. Because HN content is about hearing what people think about a certain topic/thread. Please tell me: for you, what is the difference between hearing what people think, and hearing what a human-level AI thinks? Are you saying…
> Don't most humans just regurgitate the same arguments they've just read or learned elsewhere (or even here), like 99% of the time? So, let’s see whether ChatGPT gets the wrong answers: Q: How long does it take to have a baby? A: The average length of pregnancy is about 40 weeks, or 9 months. 1/2 correct - 40 weeks is 10 months from conception to birth. Q: Why is emacs better than vi? A: […] Overall, emacs is widely…
> 1/2 correct - 40 weeks is 10 months from conception to birth.
Average length of pregnancy, ovulation to birth is 268 days -- 38.3 weeks or ~8.8 months.
But we typically count pregnancy from last period (this is easier), which makes it pretty close to the round 40 that's usually cited.
> 40 weeks is 10 months from conception to birth.
A month is ~4.35 (6957/1600) weeks, so 40 weeks is ~9.2 months (69400/6957).