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

Chat GPT is the birth of the real Web 3.0, and it's not going to be fun

lajili.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

381–390 of 392 posts

Re: Chat GPT is the birth of the real Web 3.0, and it's not going to be fun

#381

Post by brookst »

munificent wrote: post #237
brookst wrote: post #2

Not a super well thought out article. Example: lots of speculative complaints that ChatGPT will lead to an explosion of low quality and biased editorial material, without a single mention of what that problem looks like today (hint: it was already a huge problem before ChatGPT). Ditto with the “ChatGPT gave me wrong info for a query” complaint. Well, how does that compare to traditional search? I’m willing to believe…

> without a single mention of what that problem looks like today (hint: it was already a huge problem before ChatGPT). I see this counter-argument all the time and it makes no sense to me. Yes, the web is already filled with SEO trash. How is that an argument that ChatGPT won't be bad? It's a force multiplier for garbage. The pre-existence of garbage does not at all invalidate the observation that producing more garb…

I also see this argument all the time:

“New thing X is going to destroy the world!”

“Actually it’s an extension of decades-long trends and may accelerate issues we already face”

“Well it’s still bad, so any negative statement should be treated as true, even if it’s false!”

The article didn’t say ChatGPT was making low quality content worse. It said, in as many words, that ChatGPT will create this problem.

Re: Chat GPT is the birth of the real Web 3.0, and it's not going to be fun

#382

Post by argentier »

jerryzh wrote: post #374
munificent wrote: post #237

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> without a single mention of what that problem looks like today (hint: it was already a huge problem before ChatGPT). I see this counter-argument all the time and it makes no sense to me. Yes, the web is already filled with SEO trash. How is that an argument that ChatGPT won't be bad? It's a force multiplier for garbage. The pre-existence of garbage does not at all invalidate the observation that producing more garb…

because most garbage now are all ready produced by script. chatgpt will actually improve them

Better garbage? More convincing bullshit?

Are we winning?

Re: Chat GPT is the birth of the real Web 3.0, and it's not going to be fun

#383

Post by munificent »

qup wrote: post #367
munificent wrote: post #348

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Those algos just have to keep up with chatGPT the same way they've already been keeping up with spam, the 95% of the web that is a dumpster fire, etc. That "just" is an arms race so fantastically difficult that the current leading business doing it has a market cap of $1.4 trillion. Those algos are, to date, some of the world's most sophisticated uses of AI. This is like observing that the howitzer was just invente…

I don't think that's a keen analogy at all. We don't currently have chainmail. s/Google search/gmail spam filtering/youtube suggested algorithm is a dike holding back an ocean of shit. I'm not sure how to make an armor analogy, so let's just say it's really good armor. Also assuming you meant 1.4T=Alphabet, I cannot go along with your pretending that the 1.4 trillion dollar cap is a function of PageRank, nor can I pr…

I certainly hope they can handle it. But it looks to me that generative AI is posed to give a huge new weapon to bad actors and I absolutely think that's a bad thing, regardless of whether the good actors are somehow able to defend themselves from it.

Re: Chat GPT is the birth of the real Web 3.0, and it's not going to be fun

#384

Post by soiler »

dheera wrote: post #349
soiler wrote: post #311

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean, what exactly makes the first page garbage? I'm not disagreeing, but "is this site garbage" is not a question that a search engine can ask.

> "is this site garbage" Why not? If it has headers that say it was made with FrontPage 2003 and has five thousand AdSense boxes, uses old world fonts like Arial instead of HelveticaNeue Light, uses 16-bit VGA colors like #0000ff, or has bgsound and blink tags, it should perhaps be downranked.

Because those things you listed are (potential) answers to my first question, not the one you quoted.

A search engine should not see a site written in Arial and derank it for that reason. Blink tags, sure, they're obviously wrong for accessibility reasons, but there's a huge gap between those two things - and even so, how badly should they affect ranking?

I'm saying "garbage" can be subjective, and when there are objective "garbage" indicators, it's not obvious how to deal with them. What you've listed is only a small set of indicators from a small niche of so-called "garbage" sites. And personally, I don't even want to see old or old-styled sites dismissed from the web if they have good content.

Re: Chat GPT is the birth of the real Web 3.0, and it's not going to be fun

#385

Post by joquarky »

shagie wrote: post #183
jsemrau wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

An actor with a monetary incentive will always aim towards maximizing their financial outcome. Who wouldn't?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overjustification_effect If you're writing for the joy of writing (intrinsic motivation) and then start getting paid for it (attaching an extrinsic motivation to it) the original "for the joy of X" tends to get lost. It isn't a "who wouldn't" but rather a "why would you".

This is because creativity comes from a state of mind that is difficult to force, just as with sleep.

Re: Chat GPT is the birth of the real Web 3.0, and it's not going to be fun

#386

Post by nextaccountic »

dwallin wrote: post #289
nextaccountic wrote: post #269

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Curation that tracks the provenance. If we receive a string of text by itself we can't do much about it. We need to know from where it came from, whether it was written by a human, etc

Human provenance is less important than human curation here. AI can already infrequently output content that surpasses average human-generated quality in certain categories. As long as in the end you are checking that content exceeds an average bar of quality as assessed by human aesthetics, and ensuring that you have a diverse set of content (eg. not overrepresented by content that AI is particularly good or prolifi…

I still want to know if the content was written by an AI, because text quality (whatever that means) isn't the only metric humans care about.

Re: Chat GPT is the birth of the real Web 3.0, and it's not going to be fun

#387

Post by soerxpso »

munificent wrote: post #237
brookst wrote: post #2

Not a super well thought out article. Example: lots of speculative complaints that ChatGPT will lead to an explosion of low quality and biased editorial material, without a single mention of what that problem looks like today (hint: it was already a huge problem before ChatGPT). Ditto with the “ChatGPT gave me wrong info for a query” complaint. Well, how does that compare to traditional search? I’m willing to believe…

> without a single mention of what that problem looks like today (hint: it was already a huge problem before ChatGPT). I see this counter-argument all the time and it makes no sense to me. Yes, the web is already filled with SEO trash. How is that an argument that ChatGPT won't be bad? It's a force multiplier for garbage. The pre-existence of garbage does not at all invalidate the observation that producing more garb…

Search engines are already unusable for certain things that they used to be usable for. There's not really a such thing as "even more unusable." If I offer you an oven that doesn't get hot, that's not any better than an oven that makes things colder; you would not want either.

Re: Chat GPT is the birth of the real Web 3.0, and it's not going to be fun

#388

Post by soerxpso »

badcppdev wrote: post #16
Snitch-Thursday wrote: post #10

Not to be a grumpy old man, but I will say, my known original definition of Web 3.0 was the Semantic Web [1] but I have no idea if that definition came before the one in TFA about those selling javascript webpage controls marketing their latest spinner product spinning it as web 3.0 > web 2.0. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantic_Web

Web 3.0 = Semantic Net Web 3.1 = NFT/Blockchain Web 3.2 = AI Large Language Models spurting content into the ecosystem

Looking forward to every era from now on being the new Web 3.X. Web 3.3-2, beta release C, coming soon.

Re: Chat GPT is the birth of the real Web 3.0, and it's not going to be fun

#389

Post by dTal »

soerxpso wrote: post #387
munificent wrote: post #237

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> without a single mention of what that problem looks like today (hint: it was already a huge problem before ChatGPT). I see this counter-argument all the time and it makes no sense to me. Yes, the web is already filled with SEO trash. How is that an argument that ChatGPT won't be bad? It's a force multiplier for garbage. The pre-existence of garbage does not at all invalidate the observation that producing more garb…

Search engines are already unusable for certain things that they used to be usable for. There's not really a such thing as "even more unusable." If I offer you an oven that doesn't get hot, that's not any better than an oven that makes things colder; you would not want either.

I think we call that a "fridge", and they're quite popular actually...

Re: Chat GPT is the birth of the real Web 3.0, and it's not going to be fun

#390

Post by fnfontana »

brookst wrote: post #2

Not a super well thought out article. Example: lots of speculative complaints that ChatGPT will lead to an explosion of low quality and biased editorial material, without a single mention of what that problem looks like today (hint: it was already a huge problem before ChatGPT). Ditto with the “ChatGPT gave me wrong info for a query” complaint. Well, how does that compare to traditional search? I’m willing to believe…

And most people are thinking on ChatGPT like it couldn't evolve. Like it was statically attached to its current state. They are not considering its astonishing potential to evolve.

It's just the beginning, just like the internet on the early 90s. Give it 30 more years and we all gonna be AI dependants, like we are on the internet. On the near decades the future generations will not be able to just imagine life before AIs.

Post reply on HN