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

Certified 100% AI-free organic content

substack.piszek.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 275 posts

Re: Certified 100% AI-free organic content

#261

Post by euroderf »

dagw wrote: post #89
jhbadger wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>I've already run into scenarios where ChatGPT generated code that looked perfectly plausible, except for that the actual API used didn't really exist. Yes! I remember generating a seemingly reasonable R script except that the library that it called to do most of the work didn't exist! It was like code from an alternate dimension!

I asked if there where any Open Source libraries that implemented a certain algorithm. It gave me links to 3 different GitHub repos, none of which existed.

Did it have the common courtesy to add a comment saying "PRANKED!" ?

Re: Certified 100% AI-free organic content

#262

Post by euroderf »

foobarbecue wrote: post #64
dale_glass wrote: post #15

> Published content will be later used to train subsequent models, and being able to distinguish AI from human input may be very valuable going forward I find this to be a particularly interesting problem in this whole debacle. Could we end up having AI quality trend downwards due to AI ingesting its own old outputs and reinforcing bad habits? I think it's a particular risk for text generation. I've already run into…

It reminds me of a dog eating its own vomit.

Excellent analogy. Filed for future use.

Re: Certified 100% AI-free organic content

#263

Post by euroderf »

jefftk wrote: post #22

Which of these are AI free? Something written: 1. Before 1970 2. By someone who has consumed AI-generate content 3. With a ~2000-era spellchecker 4. By someone using ~2020-era neural speech-to-text software 5. With a ~2020-era spellchecker 6. By someone with an AI in the traditional editor role (reads it, gives detailed feedback) 7. By a human and an AI working together where the AI generates everything initially but…

I've always maintained that for any food product labeled "Home Style" or "Home-Made Flavor", the product must also feature a photograph of the factory floor where the product is made.

Re: Certified 100% AI-free organic content

#264

Post by euroderf »

zelias wrote: post #103

I wonder if this sentiment will ultimately lead to a "Butlerian Jihad" culling of "thinking machines" a la Dune

Well, we've got part of the Mentat angle covered already.

"It is by caffeine alone I set my mind in motion. It is by the juice of Java that thoughts acquire speed, the teeth acquire stains, the stains become a warning. It is by will alone I set my mind in motion."

Re: Certified 100% AI-free organic content

#266

Post by Out_of_Characte »

idopmstuff wrote: post #132
Out_of_Characte wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Regardless of spam, there is another fundamental issue with AI, Accountability. Any text you've read had a real person behind it with real intentions. Malice and greed or honesty and exploration. It would be very difficult to hold an AI accountable for any offence committed on accuracy or honesty. With a person, you can slowly get to the bottom of it and develop a relationship. AI will muddy the waters of people writ…

I don't think what you're saying really applies to SEO articles, though. If you don't get wedding insurance because you read some SEO article that recommends against it, even if the advice is clearly bad, can you really hold them accountable? It's tough for me to imagine you'd win that lawsuit. > With a person, you can slowly get to the bottom of it and develop a relationship. With this kind of content (with most con…

I'd agree that there is no significant difference in accountability between content farms and AI. But I think that's burying the lede because what makes HN so appealing to many is the personally written blogposts and experts in specific fields or silly hobby projects. AI has the unique ability to mimick all of that for highly specific audiences with significantly lower cost and effort. This would impact curation efforts of many different user-generated websites and posts and could create a new status quo where a nobody could be treated guilty of AI-Generated articles, SEO hacking and upvote manipulation before entertaining the thought that a natural person could be making their first concerted effort for their reputation and prove their honesty.

For now HN is a bastion of conversation across many countries and domains

Re: Certified 100% AI-free organic content

#267

Post by rcme »

CuriouslyC wrote: post #257
rcme wrote: post #243

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hmm I’m still not convinced. Gather training data can be thought of sampling the underlying distribution of the data. In that sense, you’d expect the proportions of things to converge towards the underlying distribution as you gather more data.

That would be true if we were sampling from the underlying distribution in an unbiased and balanced way from the beginning. Instead data is generated and incorporated one set at a time, and each set is biased. Jargon and terms vary, but the language plumbing is the same - new sets bolster common phrases/idioms and lengthen the tail with specific tokens. Keep in mind though, language isn't a stationary process.

Even if each dataset is biased, I’m not still not sure how you derived logarithmic growth from the general notion of bias in data. For instance, assuming the data is biased, perhaps it is biased in the other direction and contains more common patterns compared to the underlying distribution.

Re: Certified 100% AI-free organic content

#269

Post by CuriouslyC »

rcme wrote: post #267
CuriouslyC wrote: post #257

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That would be true if we were sampling from the underlying distribution in an unbiased and balanced way from the beginning. Instead data is generated and incorporated one set at a time, and each set is biased. Jargon and terms vary, but the language plumbing is the same - new sets bolster common phrases/idioms and lengthen the tail with specific tokens. Keep in mind though, language isn't a stationary process.

Even if each dataset is biased, I’m not still not sure how you derived logarithmic growth from the general notion of bias in data. For instance, assuming the data is biased, perhaps it is biased in the other direction and contains more common patterns compared to the underlying distribution.

There is a lot to this subject, it might be easier if you took a look at https://martinapugliese.github.io/data/heaps-law-languages/.

Note that when plotting corpus size vs unique words, the log plot is expected to be linear.

Re: Certified 100% AI-free organic content

#270

Post by bluefirebrand »

dymk wrote: post #199
harimau777 wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Until managers threaten to fire them for "wasting time" correcting the output.

Why do you worry that’s going to be a real problem?

Because managers already lean on engineers for "wasting time" fixing tech debt, building scalable solutions, etc.
Post reply on HN