271–280 of 392 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If I operate a webpage, and I incorporate this content quality metadata tag, why would I put anything other than "highest possible quality"?
And who judges the quality? one man's trash is another man's treasure .
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Trust is not transitive. My friends reshare all sort of crazy memes, and their friends are even worse. Just because you know someone doesn't mean they're good at reading the news or understanding what's going on in the world.
I think trust is somewhat transitive, but it's not domain independent. I have friends whose movie recommendations I trust but whose restaurant recommendations I don't, and vice versa. I have friend that I trust to be witty but not wise and others the opposite. A system that tried to model trust would probably need to support tagging people with what kinds of things you trust them in.
An endless loop of AI generated content that gets posted to the web as original human generated content, with LLMs getting re-trained on this content and spitting out more content that also gets re-posted, resulting in a cesspool of BS masquerading as organic knowledge. I'm old enough to remember when Google provided meaningful search results rather than just SEO spam, the problem is about to get an order of magnitud…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I see this take a lot and I don't get why this is different from what we have right now. > Unlimited 24/7 AI streamers on Twitch. So basically Twitch as it is? > Unlimited 24/7 AI TV shows and movies (RIP Netflix, Hollywood). Which is TV right now? > Unlimited AI opinions about any topics. Welcome to Twitter. You filter in the same way people always have. Studying, learning, acquiring taste.
My concern after seeing the AI-generated Seinfeld knock-off that passed through HN today is that it'll be easier to train a model to generate addictive content than it is to create that content with a human. I mean the AI Seinfeld was terrible, but it's an entirely software generated "show." Someone will figure out how to feed measurements of engagement into the model, and the model will continuously "improve." The n…
or it could go in the Stable Diffusion direction, where you can just ask for whatever you'd like to see more at any given time.
"Computer, please play a four episodes TV series about a cyborg chef killing aliens in space. Please add violence, drug use and a plot twist at the end".
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I see this take a lot and I don't get why this is different from what we have right now. > Unlimited 24/7 AI streamers on Twitch. So basically Twitch as it is? > Unlimited 24/7 AI TV shows and movies (RIP Netflix, Hollywood). Which is TV right now? > Unlimited AI opinions about any topics. Welcome to Twitter. You filter in the same way people always have. Studying, learning, acquiring taste.
My concern after seeing the AI-generated Seinfeld knock-off that passed through HN today is that it'll be easier to train a model to generate addictive content than it is to create that content with a human. I mean the AI Seinfeld was terrible, but it's an entirely software generated "show." Someone will figure out how to feed measurements of engagement into the model, and the model will continuously "improve." The n…
I played around with the free tier of NovelAI to see what all the fuss is about, and am absolutely convinced you are on to something.
Generating a story by repeatedly pushing a button and being fed different outcomes is literally slot-machine behavior.
An endless loop of AI generated content that gets posted to the web as original human generated content, with LLMs getting re-trained on this content and spitting out more content that also gets re-posted, resulting in a cesspool of BS masquerading as organic knowledge. I'm old enough to remember when Google provided meaningful search results rather than just SEO spam, the problem is about to get an order of magnitud…
Neil Stephenson predicted this in the novel Anathem. It ends up being an arms race with "bulshytt" filters versus generators.
In the Kessler Syndrome analogy, that's an ablative aerospace impact armour company deliberately launching and blowing up satellites to sell their goods to spacecraft builders.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Unlike Google, you can download Wikipedia and use it offline. I hope to see the same thing happening for a useful LLM. Of course that’s not feasible right now, but hopefully those costs will come down and we do actually get to run a self-hosted version of this.
The tricky thing about data is that the world constantly changes. A downloaded Wikipedia has a lot of value, but it does grow stale. And it has the advantage of being a repository of relatively static facts in a way that, say, a search engine is not. Search engines (and I suspect a ChatGPT-style engine, if one wants to talk about it about current events, things currently available, or other topics of the day) have to…
Maybe. It depends on what you're searching for. I'd say that 80% of the searches I engage in don't need a particularly fresh database to satisfy.
Online dating is going to be a nightmare with chatbots flooding the dating sites catfishing everyone. User contrib sites like Reddit will be flooded with bots that keep the conversation going, but drop in sponsored mentions into things for revenue. I think a push for real, verifiable identities and digitally signing content may happen so people can attempt to wade through what is real and what is fake.
Alternatively you can just go to real events now and spend less time on the Internet.
An endless loop of AI generated content that gets posted to the web as original human generated content, with LLMs getting re-trained on this content and spitting out more content that also gets re-posted, resulting in a cesspool of BS masquerading as organic knowledge. I'm old enough to remember when Google provided meaningful search results rather than just SEO spam, the problem is about to get an order of magnitud…
Its completely empty calories in terms of knowledge.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think trust is somewhat transitive, but it's not domain independent. I have friends whose movie recommendations I trust but whose restaurant recommendations I don't, and vice versa. I have friend that I trust to be witty but not wise and others the opposite. A system that tried to model trust would probably need to support tagging people with what kinds of things you trust them in.
This. Nobody is 100% trustworthy in every circumstance. When I say I trust someone, what I mean is that I have a good handle on what sorts of things that person can be trusted about, and what sorts of things they can't.