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

The original URL for this prediction will no longer be available in 11 years (2011)

longbets.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 105 posts

Re: The original URL for this prediction will no longer be available in 11 years (2011)

#41

Post by 9dev »

andai wrote: post #30
CSMastermind wrote: post #18

It's worth noting that some prediction URLs, for instance: https://longbets.org/6/ are offline. The original long bet was whether or not computers could pass the turing test by 2029: https://longbets.org/1/ You'd think that LLMs fulfill this, but I do wonder if a clever human could still discern between them given their particularities. https://longbets.org/9/ is another interesting one depending on whether you think…

There was a paper a while ago, where they found a strategy for GPT beating humans on the Turing test 2/3rds of the time. They just prompted it to talk the way a 13 year old girl texts. (Also they prompted it to pretend not to know anything about anything.)

Most of the LLM tells we usually recognise are due to their heavy attunement to role playing a "helpful assistant" with a knack for correct typography.

If you used a smaller corpus, followed a different kind of fine tuning routine with rather normal conversation patterns, and wrote a different base prompt, I don’t see why it shouldn’t be possible to come up with a very particular personality, so to speak.

Re: The original URL for this prediction will no longer be available in 11 years (2011)

#42

Post by munch117 »

ludwik wrote: post #4
JoshTriplett wrote: post #2

> entering the characters http://www.longbets.org/601 into the address bar of a web browser or command line tool (like curl) The part of this that's most likely to fail at some point is the "http://".

In my mind, the part that is most likely to fail is "return an HTML document that still contains the following text." Nowadays, more and more "HTML documents" do not contain any content at all, just some JavaScript that is responsible for then fetching and displaying the content.

If the text was returned using a staged process, whereby the server first returns an instruction (JavaScript), and the web browser then executes that instruction, which is what transfers the text, then that doesn't actually change anything. Those are just technical details of the transfer. You are viewing an HTML document on-screen; it makes no difference to this bet if it was returned to you by a different mechanism than originally conceived, since the bet doesn't specify any transfer mechanism, just that the URL was entered into a browser.

Re: The original URL for this prediction will no longer be available in 11 years (2011)

#43

Post by 9dev »

frotaur wrote: post #28
sublinear wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You'd think that LLMs fulfill this, but I do wonder if a clever human could still discern between them given their particularities. You don't even have to be that clever. We've all tried using it for work. They fail. In the first place, the Turing test was always a loosely defined thought experiment. I suppose it's still serving that purpose, but at least half of HN takes it way too seriously. It's absolutely not p…

I think if you trained an LLM specifically for the purpose of passing the Turing test (instead of being helpful, harmful, and so on), its likely it would pass it. You would have to train it/finetune it on a couple hundred of 'humans chatting in the context of a Turing test'.

That would not really pass the test in spirit, I think. Passing must be something that falls out as a consequence of being a good chatbot, not the other way around.

However such good conversational agents would still have benefits, and i would be curious how far the approach of building a model that’s nice to talk to can take you, as opposed to the current generation of all-knowledgable helpful assistants.

Re: The original URL for this prediction will no longer be available in 11 years (2011)

#44

Post by 9dev »

matsemann wrote: post #7

At a certain bet size it would almost be self-fulfilling, heh, as one side would be very incentivized to keep at least that url working (buying the domain + hosting it if the page were to die)

Someone should do a long bet on the continuous existence of longbets.com

Re: The original URL for this prediction will no longer be available in 11 years (2011)

#45

Post by latexr »

firefoxd wrote: post #10

One thing I've done is include my redirect rules with the web application. So my links continue to work even when I change them and forget them. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46139686

I was expecting some kind of system that would follow the pages automatically without you having to do extra work when changing the URL (“continue to work even when I change them and forget them”) but it looks like you still add the redirects manually?

That’s more than most will do, sure, but it doesn’t seem like it saves you from a broken link if you forget to add a specific redirect or miss it during a mass format change. Am I missing something?

Re: The original URL for this prediction will no longer be available in 11 years (2011)

#46

Post by 9dev »

tredre3 wrote: post #21
hypfer wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On HN, a TLDR would be helpful, because just clicking your links would potentially mean falling for shilling of ones own side-hustle. I bet there's complexity to the topic, but I am sure you could put it into a few words instead of just leaving a hook for others to click on.

I know nothing of Safecloud, but freenet failed for a very valid reasons: 1. Data retention isn't infinite. If the source disappears from the network, peers will prune it shortly. This is exponentially true in our multimedia-heavy world. 2. Despite 1, if you actually want to delete something you published, you can't. Absolutists will see this as a good thing. Normal people will see this as a problem. 3. Peer-to-peer…

Is the p2p problem really still one in our world that is mobile first, but also has ubiquitous internet connectivity pretty much everywhere? I’m almost sure I could host my website from my phone and have at least 99.5% percent of uptime.

Re: The original URL for this prediction will no longer be available in 11 years (2011)

#47

Post by hahahaa »

CSMastermind wrote: post #18

It's worth noting that some prediction URLs, for instance: https://longbets.org/6/ are offline. The original long bet was whether or not computers could pass the turing test by 2029: https://longbets.org/1/ You'd think that LLMs fulfill this, but I do wonder if a clever human could still discern between them given their particularities. https://longbets.org/9/ is another interesting one depending on whether you think…

By 2029 things will be different. Humans will have learned to talk like LLMs.

Re: The original URL for this prediction will no longer be available in 11 years (2011)

#48

Post by mmahemoff »

CSMastermind wrote: post #18

It's worth noting that some prediction URLs, for instance: https://longbets.org/6/ are offline. The original long bet was whether or not computers could pass the turing test by 2029: https://longbets.org/1/ You'd think that LLMs fulfill this, but I do wonder if a clever human could still discern between them given their particularities. https://longbets.org/9/ is another interesting one depending on whether you think…

Wayback shows #6 as "By 2010, more than 50 percent of books sold worldwide will be printed on demand at the point of sale in the form of library-quality paperbacks."

It was removed early 2011. Is this what happens when they can't decide on who won?

Re: The original URL for this prediction will no longer be available in 11 years (2011)

#49

Post by tsimionescu »

CSMastermind wrote: post #18

It's worth noting that some prediction URLs, for instance: https://longbets.org/6/ are offline. The original long bet was whether or not computers could pass the turing test by 2029: https://longbets.org/1/ You'd think that LLMs fulfill this, but I do wonder if a clever human could still discern between them given their particularities. https://longbets.org/9/ is another interesting one depending on whether you think…

> You'd think that LLMs fulfill this, but I do wonder if a clever human could still discern between them given their particularities.

I think the clear winning strategy is to find some of the common sense reasoning fails that are still quite common, like the "should I walk or drive to the car wash" one from a few months ago.

Re: The original URL for this prediction will no longer be available in 11 years (2011)

#50

Post by derdi »

CSMastermind wrote: post #18

It's worth noting that some prediction URLs, for instance: https://longbets.org/6/ are offline. The original long bet was whether or not computers could pass the turing test by 2029: https://longbets.org/1/ You'd think that LLMs fulfill this, but I do wonder if a clever human could still discern between them given their particularities. https://longbets.org/9/ is another interesting one depending on whether you think…

The Turing test has been passed. The Turing test had already been passed in 2002. The Turing test isn't about some machine fooling all humans all the time. It's about fooling some humans some of the time. That's an extremely low bar. It has been cleared. Let's put this to rest.
Post reply on HN