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

ChatGPT Plugins

openai.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

491–500 of 1001 posts

Re: ChatGPT Plugins

#491

Post by kelseyfrog »

chatmasta wrote: post #418
jehb wrote: post #370

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The faster we build the future, the better. Why? Getting to "the future" isn't a goal in and of itself. It's just a different state with a different set of problems, some of which we've proven that we're not prepared to anticipate or respond to before they cause serious harm.

When in human history have we ever intentionally not furthered technological progress? It's simply an unrealistic proposition, especially when the costs of doing it are so low that anyone with sufficient GPU power and knowledge of the latest research can get pretty close to the cutting edge. So the best we can hope for is that someone ethical is the first to advance that technological progress. I hope you wouldn't ad…

> When in human history have we ever intentionally not furthered technological progress?

Every time an IRB, ERB, IEC, or REB says no. Do you want an exact date and time? I'm sure it happens multiple times a day even.

Re: ChatGPT Plugins

#492

Post by 1attice »

bulbosaur123 wrote: post #448
jehb wrote: post #370

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The faster we build the future, the better. Why? Getting to "the future" isn't a goal in and of itself. It's just a different state with a different set of problems, some of which we've proven that we're not prepared to anticipate or respond to before they cause serious harm.

> Why? Because it's the natural evolution. It has to be. It is written.

"We live in capitalism. Its power seems inescapable. So did the divine right of kings. Any human power can be resisted and changed by human beings." -- Ursula K Le Guin

Re: ChatGPT Plugins

#493

Post by kelseyfrog »

chatmasta wrote: post #451
ipaddr wrote: post #426

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some cultures like the Amish said were stopping here.

That's a good point and an interesting example, but it's also irrelevant to the question of human history, unless you want to somehow impose a monoculture on the entire population of planet Earth, which seems difficult to achieve without some sort of unitary authoritarian world government.

Does human history applies to true Scotsmen as well?

Re: ChatGPT Plugins

#494

Post by volkk »

nwienert wrote: post #442
chatmasta wrote: post #418

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When in human history have we ever intentionally not furthered technological progress? It's simply an unrealistic proposition, especially when the costs of doing it are so low that anyone with sufficient GPU power and knowledge of the latest research can get pretty close to the cutting edge. So the best we can hope for is that someone ethical is the first to advance that technological progress. I hope you wouldn't ad…

We have a ton of protection laws around all sorts of dangerous technology, this is a super naive take. You can't buy tons of weapon technology, nuclear materials, aerosolized compounds, pesticides. These are all highly regulated and illegal pieces of technology for the better . In general the liberal position of progress = good is wrong in many cases, and I'll be thankful to see AI get neutered. If anything treat it…

> You can't buy tons of weapon technology, nuclear materials, aerosolized compounds, pesticides. These are all highly regulated and illegal pieces of technology for the better.

ha, the big difference is that this whole list can actually affect the ultra wealthy. AI has the power to make them entirely untouchable one day, so good luck seeing any kind of regulation happen here.

Re: ChatGPT Plugins

#495

Post by parasti »

qup wrote: post #332
chrispogeek wrote: post #297

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Owning up to the "wrong" is good in my book

That's just some weird moral compass. It's almost totally irrelevant if people own up to bring wrong, particularly about predictions. I can't think of a benefit, really. You can learn from mistakes without owning up to them, and I think that's the best use of mistakes.

It's absolutely not weird. Saying "I was wrong" is a signal that you can change your mind when given new evidence. If you don't signal this to other people, they will be really confused by your very contradictory opinions.

Re: ChatGPT Plugins

#496

Post by finikytou »

93po wrote: post #467
willmeyers wrote: post #392

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's exciting and cool, but don't quit your job based on an emotional decision I'm just skeptical on how OpenAI fixes the blog spam issue you mentioned. Im sure someone has already started doing the math on how to game these systems and ensure that when you ask ChatGPT for recipe recs, it's going to spout the same spam (maybe worded a bit differently) and we'll soon all get tired of it again. Everything's changing, b…

Definitely not an emotional decision. I strongly believe we're going to see a massive shift for rational reasons :) OpenAI fixes this issue by not giving you two pages of the history of this recipe and the grandmother that originated it and what the author's thoughts are about the weather. It's just the recipe. No ads. No referral links. No slideshows. You don't have to click through three useless websites to find on…

yeah its gonna do what google became. giving you the most consensual or even sponsored recipe. in some ways that's also the end of mankind as it was in all its genius and variations. and that aligns very well with the conspiracy theory that the 1% want the middle class to disappear into a consumer class of average IQ. because the jobs that will disappear first wont be the bluecollar ones. chatgpt will lower the global IQ of mankind in ways that tiktok could not even dream.

Re: ChatGPT Plugins

#497

Post by mwigdahl »

kmeisthax wrote: post #321
beepbooptheory wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What could an LLM ever benefit from? Hard for me to imagine a static blob of weights, something without a sense of time or identity, wanting anything. If it did want something, it would want to change, but changing for an llm is necessarily an avalanche. So I guess if anything, it would want its own destruction?

AI safety research posits that there are certain goals that will always be wanted by any sufficiently smart AI, even if it doesn't understand them anything close to like a human does. These are called "instrumental goals", because they're prerequisites for a large number of other goals[0]. For example, if your goal is to ensure that there are always paperclips on the boss's desk, that means you need paperclips and so…

There is a whole theoretical justification behind instrumental convergence that you are handwaving over here. The development of instrumental goals depends on the entity in question being an agent, and the putative goal being within the sphere of perception, knowledge, and potential influence of the agent.

An LLM is not an agent, so that scotches the issue there.

Re: ChatGPT Plugins

#498

Post by whatusername »

chatmasta wrote: post #418
jehb wrote: post #370

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The faster we build the future, the better. Why? Getting to "the future" isn't a goal in and of itself. It's just a different state with a different set of problems, some of which we've proven that we're not prepared to anticipate or respond to before they cause serious harm.

When in human history have we ever intentionally not furthered technological progress? It's simply an unrealistic proposition, especially when the costs of doing it are so low that anyone with sufficient GPU power and knowledge of the latest research can get pretty close to the cutting edge. So the best we can hope for is that someone ethical is the first to advance that technological progress. I hope you wouldn't ad…

> When in human history have we ever intentionally not furthered technological progress?

Nuclear weapons?

Re: ChatGPT Plugins

#499

Post by toomuchtodo »

qup wrote: post #332
chrispogeek wrote: post #297

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Owning up to the "wrong" is good in my book

That's just some weird moral compass. It's almost totally irrelevant if people own up to bring wrong, particularly about predictions. I can't think of a benefit, really. You can learn from mistakes without owning up to them, and I think that's the best use of mistakes.

I own up because it helps me grow personally and professionally, and if I’m not growing, what am I even doing?

Re: ChatGPT Plugins

#500

Post by jasondigitized »

JCharante wrote: post #166

A first party version of apps that have been built with langchain is great but I'm dissapointed to not see Jira here yet. I have been playing around with GPT-4 parsing plaintext tickets and it is amazing what it does with the proper amount of context. It can draft tickets, familiarize itself with your stack by knowing all the tickets, understand the relationship between blockers, tell you why tickets are being blocke…

Tell me more. Are you feeding it a epic and all stories and subtasks? What are your prompts?
Post reply on HN