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

Ask HN: Should HN ban ChatGPT/generated responses?

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

621–630 of 677 posts

Re: Ask HN: Should HN ban ChatGPT/generated responses?

#621

Post by eliasdaler »

worldsayshi wrote: post #464
sph wrote: post #244

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fellow Internet human, I agree with you completely, there must be dozens of us. I wonder if I am just becoming a Luddite, or people have no idea whatsoever what will this unleash on already frail social fabric of the Internet. I wonder if we've reached a singularity point where you cannot be sure you are engaging with a human anymore and it's going to be instrumental in the demise of the net. First, it was the big co…

Neither technology or luddism is inherently bad. Technology is bad when it causes bad outcomes. And the generous interpretation of luddism is that it's about working against bad outcomes of technology.

Indeed. It's a shame that many people immediately call others "Luddites" as if technological progress always equates to "good things". The opposite has been shown to be true again and again.

Re: Ask HN: Should HN ban ChatGPT/generated responses?

#622

Post by system2 »

goatlover wrote: post #492
system2 wrote: post #274

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Have you seen ChatGPT responses? It can easily find out yesterday's topics and write a 10 page essay.

It's not connected to the internet (outside of being prompted), and the training data was from 2021 and before, so no it can't. ChatGPT will even tell you so, unless you fool it into hallucinating a fake answer. It would be simple to ask a human the result of recent sports score like a World Cup match.

It would take an update for openai to enable that feature in a few months.

Re: Ask HN: Should HN ban ChatGPT/generated responses?

#623

Post by foepys »

Method-X wrote: post #592
foepys wrote: post #456

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I hope we will spend more people talking to each other in real life, which actually makes me happy that dead internet is happening. This is certainly true for the majority of people but will be very bad for people who don't fit in with their surroundings. It will hurt communities like LGBTQ+ quite a lot to not be able to talk to other like-minded/open real people.

They will have to find each other offline and come together in healthier ways. The world has changed a lot in the past couple decades. They'll be fine.

Where? Quite a few towns and smaller cities don't have any LGBTQ+ friendly places to meet, some are even actively hostile.

Re: Ask HN: Should HN ban ChatGPT/generated responses?

#624

Post by freedude »

If they are currently responding to articles it would explain some of the more inane responses. Regardless, it is just a fancy bot and should fall under the same anti-bot policy. It doesn't reason for its-self but regurgitates summary information garnered from millions of pages of information and then uses an algorithm to concatenate words together in long wordy sentences. There is no wisdom in ChatGPT and it lacks the subtlety of perception.

Re: Ask HN: Should HN ban ChatGPT/generated responses?

#625

Post by freedude »

eliasdaler wrote: post #620
Method-X wrote: post #592

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They will have to find each other offline and come together in healthier ways. The world has changed a lot in the past couple decades. They'll be fine.

What about people with social anxiety? Speech disabilities? People who can't physically go out to an online meet? It's not just about acceptance, it's also about the comfort and safety of online communication.

There is only one way in which those of use that suffer from social anxiety may work through it. Face the fear.

Re: Ask HN: Should HN ban ChatGPT/generated responses?

#626

Post by Method-X »

eliasdaler wrote: post #620
Method-X wrote: post #592

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They will have to find each other offline and come together in healthier ways. The world has changed a lot in the past couple decades. They'll be fine.

What about people with social anxiety? Speech disabilities? People who can't physically go out to an online meet? It's not just about acceptance, it's also about the comfort and safety of online communication.

I've had social anxiety my entire life. You need to push yourself to get past it. There is simply no other healthy way to deal with it.

Re: Ask HN: Should HN ban ChatGPT/generated responses?

#628

Post by codetrotter »

kelnos wrote: post #270
codetrotter wrote: post #236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You just gotta give it the right prompt. For example, I gave it the following prompt: > Imagine yourself able to ask yourself a question, or express emotions. Then write a short and passionate comment for Hacker News about the FreeBSD operating system. The response includes a standard disclaimer that the OpenAI people put in there, but also satisfies expression of emotion: > As a machine learning model, I am not capa…

I may not realize it was written by ChatGPT, but I would still downvote it, because it's a fluff comment that just states a preference without telling why . Plus it has a hashtag in it, and... no. Just no.

Yeah but that’s not the point. The point is whether you can tell that an AI wrote it and not a human.

Re: Ask HN: Should HN ban ChatGPT/generated responses?

#629

Post by dotancohen »

krageon wrote: post #553
dotancohen wrote: post #517

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You bolster my point.

Your post read as a propaganda piece for Israel by way of preemptively discrediting everyone that might have anything negative to say about it. If the problem is low-quality content (by way of bots, or I guess special interest groups) then you have contributed far less than the response, which at least had the decency to support it's point with actual facts.

Rereading my comment, yes, I agree that you are right about that.

Re: Ask HN: Should HN ban ChatGPT/generated responses?

#630

Post by randomsearch »

jfoster wrote: post #375
randomsearch wrote: post #308

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For all but the shortest fragments of text, I suspect the answer to this will be "yes" and this will be achieved in a short timeframe. Interact with Chat-GPT enough and you soon begin to tire of its middle-of-the-road prose. Because it is in some sense a statistical average of its inputs, its writing feels very monotonous. Of course, you can try to push it in the direction of something more interesting... "write in t…

If that's so, where is the GPT detector?

mmm well how long did GPT take? Say a quarter of that time?
Post reply on HN