Live data from Hacker News

Scientists aghast at AI rat with genitals in peer-reviewed article

arstechnica.com

61–68 of 68 posts

Re: Scientists aghast at AI rat with genitals in peer-reviewed article

#61
post #57
post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The future is probably mediocre. Things that are "good enough" replace real craftsmanship.

Except where it is needed the most. I doubt you’ll get a fusion reactor running with sloppy craftsmanship. I install heavy machinery for a living. The devices I install simply won’t work unless I do it near perfect.

Simpson's predicted that

Re: Scientists aghast at AI rat with genitals in peer-reviewed article

#63
post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Great, I can't wait for appliances that stuxnet themselves shortly after their warranty period. New home automation hack: have your pi-hole pull double duty by running a local, pirate NTP server that forever makes the appliances think they're only a year old.

GE washing machines did exactly that.

have you got a link for that?

Re: Scientists aghast at AI rat with genitals in peer-reviewed article

#64
post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This has not been my experience with any of the promotion committees I've been on. But Frontiers has been off my list since Frontiers in Public Health published a number of AIDS denialism papers. And yeah, every figure in this paper is nonsensical garbage.

Is the text garbage as well? I don't have any knowledge of the subject area.

The text was ok, I do not know anything about spermatogenesis but a fair bit about the JAK/STAT pathway. The abstract was pure LLM, however. It has been retracted.

Re: Scientists aghast at AI rat with genitals in peer-reviewed article

#65
post #12

One of the things that worry me the most about AI is that it enables some of the most sloppiest and laziest operators to become even more sloppy and lazy.

The future is probably mediocre. Things that are "good enough" replace real craftsmanship.

That thing isn't even "good enough". I mean it literally has label "dck" on it. Not even "dick", "dck". It's hilariously bad for anyone bothering to look for like 5 seconds, and yet it was supposedly peer-reviewed by multiple serious scientists, and absolutely hilariously awful diagrams were just fine. I don't think it raises to the level of "mediocre", it's more like "anything goes as long at it looks pretty from afar".

Re: Scientists aghast at AI rat with genitals in peer-reviewed article

#66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let's not forget that OpenAI has probably scraped that POS paper and added it to ChatGPT. Someone should ask it what "iollotte sserotgomar" is. Also Note on the Mission Statement: "Frontiers follows the guidelines and best practice recommendations published by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Authors should refer to the author guidelines for full details. Frontiers in Cell and Developmental Biology is memb…

I wonder what happens when the majority of the Internet is bullshit generated by LLMs (which can't be long, surely), which is then used to train the latest LLMs. Will we pass an LLM bullshit horizon where the entire Internet becomes "iollotte sserotgomar" and it's brethren?

I guess that's the "singularity" we've been told about - when the amount of bullshit is so massive that it completely overwhelms any attempts at making sense of anything online or find anything.

Re: Scientists aghast at AI rat with genitals in peer-reviewed article

#67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let's not forget that OpenAI has probably scraped that POS paper and added it to ChatGPT. Someone should ask it what "iollotte sserotgomar" is. Also Note on the Mission Statement: "Frontiers follows the guidelines and best practice recommendations published by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Authors should refer to the author guidelines for full details. Frontiers in Cell and Developmental Biology is memb…

I wonder what happens when the majority of the Internet is bullshit generated by LLMs (which can't be long, surely), which is then used to train the latest LLMs. Will we pass an LLM bullshit horizon where the entire Internet becomes "iollotte sserotgomar" and it's brethren?

IIRC, the quality takes a dive when an AI is uncritically trained on its own output.

Re: Scientists aghast at AI rat with genitals in peer-reviewed article

#68
post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wonder what happens when the majority of the Internet is bullshit generated by LLMs (which can't be long, surely), which is then used to train the latest LLMs. Will we pass an LLM bullshit horizon where the entire Internet becomes "iollotte sserotgomar" and it's brethren?

I guess that's the "singularity" we've been told about - when the amount of bullshit is so massive that it completely overwhelms any attempts at making sense of anything online or find anything.

Yes, singularlity is a good word to use. I wrote up my thoughts here: https://successfulsoftware.net/2024/02/18/the-ai-bullshit-si...

HN thread: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39422528

Post reply on HN