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

Why wordfreq will not be updated

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

301–310 of 542 posts

Re: Why wordfreq will not be updated

#301

Post by sashank_1509 »

Not to be too dismissive, but is there a worthwhile direction of research to pursue that is not LLM’s in NLP?

If we add linguistics to NLP I can see an argument but if we define NLP as the research of enabling a computer process language then it seems to me that LLM’s/ Generative AI is the only research that an NLP practitioner should focus on and everything else is moot. Is there any other paradigm that we think can enable a computer understand language other than training a large deep learning model on a lot of data?

Re: Why wordfreq will not be updated

#302

Post by abridges6523 »

38 wrote: post #238
solardev wrote: post #211

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Have "good" small webs EVER prevailed? Every content system seems to get polluted by noise once it hits mainstream usage: IRC, Usenet, reddit, Facebook, geocities, Yahoo, webrings, etc. Once-small curated selections eventually grow big enough to become victims of their own successes and taken over by spam. It's always an arms race of quality vs quantity, and eventually the curators can't keep up with the sheer volume…

its so easy to solve this problem, not sure why anyone hasnt done it yet. 1. build a userbase, free product 2. once userbase get big enough, any new account requires a monthly fee, maybe $1 3. keep raising the fee higher and higher, until you get to the point that the userbase is manageable. no ads, simple.

This sounds like a good idea. I do wonder if enough people would sign up for it to be a worthy venture because I think the main issue with ads is I think once you add any price at all dramatically reduces participation even if it’s not about cost some people just see the payment and immediately disengage.!

Re: Why wordfreq will not be updated

#303

Post by andrethegiant »

dweinus wrote: post #125

> Now the Web at large is full of slop generated by large language models, written by no one to communicate nothing. Fair and accurate. In the best cases the person running the model didn't write this stuff and word salad doesn't communicate whatever they meant to say. In many cases though, content is simply pumped out for SEO with no intention of being valuable to anyone.

That sentence stood out to me too, very powerful. Felt it right in the feels.

Re: Why wordfreq will not be updated

#304

Post by thechao »

bane wrote: post #300

This is one of the vanguards warning of the changes coming in the post-AI world. >> Generative AI has polluted the data Just like low-background steel marks the break in history from before and after the nuclear age, these types of data mark the distinction from before and after AI. Future models will begin to continue to amplify certain statistical properties from their training, that amplified data will continue to…

That went off the rails quickly. Calm down dude: my mother-in-law isn't going to forget words because of AI; she's gonna forget words because she's 3 glasses of crappy Texas wine into the evening.

Re: Why wordfreq will not be updated

#305

Post by sinkasapa »

sashank_1509 wrote: post #301

Not to be too dismissive, but is there a worthwhile direction of research to pursue that is not LLM’s in NLP? If we add linguistics to NLP I can see an argument but if we define NLP as the research of enabling a computer process language then it seems to me that LLM’s/ Generative AI is the only research that an NLP practitioner should focus on and everything else is moot. Is there any other paradigm that we think can…

Maybe it is "including linguistics" but most of the world's languages don't have the data available to train on. So I think one major question for NLP is exactly the question you posed: "Is there any other paradigm that we think can enable a computer understand language other than training a large deep learning model on a lot of data?"

Re: Why wordfreq will not be updated

#306

Post by fer »

bane wrote: post #300

This is one of the vanguards warning of the changes coming in the post-AI world. >> Generative AI has polluted the data Just like low-background steel marks the break in history from before and after the nuclear age, these types of data mark the distinction from before and after AI. Future models will begin to continue to amplify certain statistical properties from their training, that amplified data will continue to…

> Future models will begin to continue to amplify certain statistical properties from their training, that amplified data will continue to pollute the public space from which future training data is drawn.

That's why on FB I mark my own writing as AI generated, and the AI generated slop as genuine. Because what is disguised as "transparency disclaimer" is just flagging content of what's a potential dataset to train from and what isn't.

Re: Why wordfreq will not be updated

#307

Post by wvbdmp »

bane wrote: post #300

This is one of the vanguards warning of the changes coming in the post-AI world. >> Generative AI has polluted the data Just like low-background steel marks the break in history from before and after the nuclear age, these types of data mark the distinction from before and after AI. Future models will begin to continue to amplify certain statistical properties from their training, that amplified data will continue to…

I Have No Words, And I Must Scream

Re: Why wordfreq will not be updated

#308

Post by aryonoco »

sangnoir wrote: post #294
aryonoco wrote: post #273

I feel so conflicted about this. On the one hand, I completely agree with Robyn Speer. The open web is dead, and the web is in a really sad state. The other day I decided to publish my personal blog on gopher. Just cause, there's a lot less crap on gopher (and no, gopher is not the answer). But... A couple of weeks ago, I had to send a video file to my wife's grandfather, who is 97, lives in another country, and does…

> Back in pre-LLM days, it's not like I would have hired a x264 expert to do this job for me. I would have either had to spend hours more on this task, or more likely, this 97 year old man would never have seen his great granddaughter's dance Didn't most DVD burning software include video transcoding as a standard feature? Back in the day, you'd have used Nero Burning ROM, or Handbrake - granted, the quality may not…

Back in the day they did. I checked handbrake but now there's nothing specific about DVD compatibility there. I could have picked something like Super HQ 576p, and there's a good chance that would have sufficed, but old DVD players were extremely finicky about filenames, extensions, interlacing, etc. I didn't want to risk the DVD traveling half way across the world only to find that it's not playable.

Re: Why wordfreq will not be updated

#309

Post by midnitewarrior »

bane wrote: post #300

This is one of the vanguards warning of the changes coming in the post-AI world. >> Generative AI has polluted the data Just like low-background steel marks the break in history from before and after the nuclear age, these types of data mark the distinction from before and after AI. Future models will begin to continue to amplify certain statistical properties from their training, that amplified data will continue to…

From the day of the first spoken word, humans have guided the development of language through conversational use and institution. With the advent of AI being used to publish documents into the open web, humans have given up their exclusive domain.

What would it take for Open AI overlords to inject words they want to force into usage in their models and will new words into use? Few have had the power to do such things. Open AI through its popular GPT platform now has the potential of dictating the evolution of human language.

This is novel and scary.

Re: Why wordfreq will not be updated

#310

Post by squigz »

psychoslave wrote: post #286
squigz wrote: post #218

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> people consuming auto-generated content to keep the masses from away from critical thinking. This is now happening The people who stay away from critical thinking were doing that already and will continue to do so, 'AI' content or not.

I don't know, individually finely tuned addictive content served as real time interactive feedback loops is an other level of propaganda and attention capture tool than largest common denominator of the general crowd served as static passive content.

Perhaps, but the solution is the same either way, and it isn't trying to ban technology or halt progress or just sit and cry about how society is broken. It's educating each other and our children on the way these things work, how to break out of them, and how we might more responsibly use the technology.
Post reply on HN