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

Adding a feature because ChatGPT incorrectly thinks it exists

holovaty.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

361–370 of 451 posts

Re: Adding a feature because ChatGPT incorrectly thinks it exists

#361

Post by visarga »

suzzer99 wrote: post #53
kragen wrote: post #30

I've found this to be one of the most useful ways to use (at least) GPT-4 for programming. Instead of telling it how an API works, I make it guess, maybe starting with some example code to which a feature needs to be added. Sometimes it comes up with a better approach than I had thought of. Then I change the API so that its code works. Conversely, I sometimes present it with some existing code and ask it what it does…

> Sometimes it comes up with a better approach than I had thought of. IMO this has always been the killer use case for AI—from Google Maps to Grammarly. I discovered Grammarly at the very last phase of writing my book. I accepted maybe 1/3 of its suggestions, which is pretty damn good considering my book had already been edited by me dozens of times AND professionally copy-edited. But if I'd have accepted all of Gram…

Yes, we have the context - our unique lived experience, and are ultimately accountable for our actions. LLMs have no skin. They have no desires, and cannot be punished in any way. No matter how smart they get, we are providing their opportunities to generate value, guidance and iteration, and in the end have to live with the outcomes.

Re: Adding a feature because ChatGPT incorrectly thinks it exists

#362

Post by xigoi »

eru wrote: post #317
suzzer99 wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Sometimes it comes up with a better approach than I had thought of. IMO this has always been the killer use case for AI—from Google Maps to Grammarly. I discovered Grammarly at the very last phase of writing my book. I accepted maybe 1/3 of its suggestions, which is pretty damn good considering my book had already been edited by me dozens of times AND professionally copy-edited. But if I'd have accepted all of Gram…

> The problem is executives want to completely remove humans from the loop, which almost universally leads to disastrous results. That's how you get economics of scale. Google couldn't have a human in the loop to review every page of search results before handing them out in response to queries.

In the case of a search engine, the human in the loop is the user selecting which result to click.

Re: Adding a feature because ChatGPT incorrectly thinks it exists

#363

Post by tree-hugger »

throwaway9153 wrote: post #357
dotancohen wrote: post #339

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the fact people having their jobs replace by technology are completely screwed over is a result of the society we have all created together, it's not a rule of nature. How did the handloom weavers and spinners handle the rise of the machines?

> How did the handloom weavers and spinners handle the rise of the machines? In the past, new jobs appeared that the workers could migrate to. Today, it seems that AI may replace jobs much quicker than before and it's not clear to me which new jobs will be "invented" to balance the loss. Optimists will say that we have always managed to invent new types of work fast enough to reduce the impact to society, but in my o…

> In the past, new jobs appeared that the workers could migrate to.

There was no happy and smooth transition that you seem to allude to. The Luddite movement was in direct response to this: people were dying over this. Factory owners fired or massively reduced wages of workers, replacing many with child workers in precarious and dangerous conditions. In response, the workers smashed the machines that were being used to eliminate their jobs and prevent them from feeding themselves and their families (_not_ the machines that were used to make their jobs easier).

Re: Adding a feature because ChatGPT incorrectly thinks it exists

#364

Post by visarga »

shafyy wrote: post #358
csinode wrote: post #271

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem here is societal, not technological. An end state where people do less work than they do today but society is more productive is desirable, and we shouldn't be trying to force companies/governments/etc to employ people to do an unnecessary job. The problem is that people who are laid off often experience significant life disruption. And people who work in a field that is largely or entirely replaced by te…

> The problem here is societal, not technological. I disagree. I think it's both. Yes, we need good frameworks and incentivizes on a economic/political level. But also, saying that it's not a tech problem is the same as saying "guns don't kill people". The truth is, if there was no AI tech developed, we would not need to regulate it so that greed does not take over. Same with guns.

Oh the web was full of slop long before LLMs arrived. Nothing new. If anything, AI slop is higher quality than was SEO crap. And of course we can't uninvent AI just like we can't unborn a human.

Re: Adding a feature because ChatGPT incorrectly thinks it exists

#365

Post by adrianh »

Thorrez wrote: post #338
adrianh wrote: post #331

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, Soundslice has a ton of tab-first users. And in fact the primary reason I founded the site was to scratch my own itch of being able to create tab that's synced with real audio recordings. (I'm a guitarist myself.)

When I read the blog post, I thought it was saying that Soundslice didn't have any tab support. The comparison of "we expect this (classical notation screenshot) but instead got this (ascii tab screenshot)" made me think that the only thing Soundslice supported was classical notation.

Definitely a subtle distinction there. Soundslice supports tab in many formats (MusicXML, Guitar Pro, PowerTab, TuxGuitar, PDF/images of published tab, or tab notated directly in the Soundslice editor) but didn't support ASCII format yet.

Re: Adding a feature because ChatGPT incorrectly thinks it exists

#366

Post by rorylaitila »

colechristensen wrote: post #246
rorylaitila wrote: post #35

I've come across something related when building the indexing tool for my vintage ad archive using OpenAI vision. No matter how I tried to prompt engineer the entity extraction into the defined structure I was looking for, OpenAI simply has its own ideas. Some of those ideas are actually good! For example it was extracting celebrity names, I hadn't thought of that. For other things, it would simply not follow my inst…

There are tools for defining structured outputs also called grammars which aren't instructions. Example: https://llama-cpp-agent.readthedocs.io/en/latest/structured-...

Thanks, I'll check it out

Re: Adding a feature because ChatGPT incorrectly thinks it exists

#367

Post by Piskvorrr »

dotancohen wrote: post #339
csinode wrote: post #271

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem here is societal, not technological. An end state where people do less work than they do today but society is more productive is desirable, and we shouldn't be trying to force companies/governments/etc to employ people to do an unnecessary job. The problem is that people who are laid off often experience significant life disruption. And people who work in a field that is largely or entirely replaced by te…

> the fact people having their jobs replace by technology are completely screwed over is a result of the society we have all created together, it's not a rule of nature. How did the handloom weavers and spinners handle the rise of the machines?

Attempting to unionize. Then the factory owners hired thugs to decapitate the movement.

Oh wait, that's not the disneyfied technooptimistic version of Luddites? Sorry.

Re: Adding a feature because ChatGPT incorrectly thinks it exists

#368

Post by latexr »

JimDabell wrote: post #342
fzeroracer wrote: post #341

Earlier quoted context omitted.

OK, so how do I edit ChatGPT so it stops lying then?

You have ignored my point. A technology can be extremely useful despite not being perfect. Failure cases can be taken into consideration rationally without turning it into a moral panic. You have no ability to edit Wikipedia to stop it from lying. Somebody can come along and re-add the lie a millisecond later.

No, that is not accurate. Wikipedia has a number of guardrails and such an edit war would be detected and investigated. Possibly the page protected and the offending IP or account banned.

Wikipedia edits are monitored and vandalism is taken seriously, especially on the more important pages.

Re: Adding a feature because ChatGPT incorrectly thinks it exists

#369

Post by latexr »

JimDabell wrote: post #340
gortok wrote: post #254

I think folks have taken the wrong lesson from this. It’s not that they added a new feature because there was demand. They added a new feature because technology hallucinated a feature that didn’t exist. The savior of tech, generative AI, was telling folks a feature existed that didn’t exist. That’s what the headline is, and in a sane world the folks that run ChatGPT would be falling over themselves to be sure it did…

You sound like all the naysayers when Wikipedia was new. Did you know anybody can go onto Wikipedia and edit a page to add a lie‽ How can you possibly trust what you read on there‽ Do you think Wikipedia should issue groveling apologies every time it happens? Meanwhile, sensible people have concluded that, even though it isn’t perfect, Wikipedia is still very, very useful – despite the possibility of being misled occ…

> despite the possibility of being misled occasionally.

There is a chasm of difference between being misled occasionally (Wikipedia) and frequently (LLMs). I don’t think you understand how much effort goes on behind the scenes at Wikipedia. No, not everyone can edit every Wikipedia page willy-nilly. Pages for major political figures often can only be edited with an account. IPs like those of iCloud Private Relay are banned and can’t anonymously edit the most basic of pages.

Furthermore, Wikipedia was always honest about what it is from the start. They managed expectations, underpromised and overdelivered. The bozos releasing LLMs talk about them as if they created the embryo of god, and giving money to their religion will solve all your problems.

Re: Adding a feature because ChatGPT incorrectly thinks it exists

#370

Post by Sophira »

visarga wrote: post #364
shafyy wrote: post #358

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The problem here is societal, not technological. I disagree. I think it's both. Yes, we need good frameworks and incentivizes on a economic/political level. But also, saying that it's not a tech problem is the same as saying "guns don't kill people". The truth is, if there was no AI tech developed, we would not need to regulate it so that greed does not take over. Same with guns.

Oh the web was full of slop long before LLMs arrived. Nothing new. If anything, AI slop is higher quality than was SEO crap. And of course we can't uninvent AI just like we can't unborn a human.

It depends on the metric you use.

Yes, AI text could be considered higher quality than traditional SEO, but at the same time, it's also very much not, because it always sounds like it might be authoritative, but you could be reading something hallucinated.

In the end, the text was still only ever made to get visitors to websites, not to provide accurate information.

Post reply on HN