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

ChatGPT Pulse

openai.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

741–750 of 766 posts

Re: ChatGPT Pulse

#741

Post by latexr »

meowface wrote: post #671
latexr wrote: post #508

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Those are exactly the people who shouldn’t use these tools. They’ll be sucked in to whatever bullshit the LLM peddles them and become unable to leave.

As long as it's helping them be productive, I don't really see an issue with that. Going from doing nothing to doing something is a net boost.

But it’s not helping them “be productive” (which is a horrible metric anyway, life is not about productivity above everything else), it’s sucking their lives and severing their relationships and connection to the real world.

https://archive.ph/20250924025805/https://www.nytimes.com/20...

https://archive.is/26aHF

Re: ChatGPT Pulse

#742

Post by astrange »

jayGlow wrote: post #725
astrange wrote: post #710

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ironically, Bradbury likes to tell people that Fahrenheit 451 isn't about the thing it was obviously supposed to be about (censorship) because he now wants it to have been a metaphor for cancel culture.

he's been dead for a decade so I doubt he now wants the meaning to be anything. besides that he also never said anything about cancel culture he said it's about how tv turns you into a moron. https://www.openculture.com/2017/08/ray-bradbury-reveals-the...

> In a 1994 interview, Bradbury stated that Fahrenheit 451 was more relevant during this time than in any other, stating that, "it works even better because we have political correctness now. Political correctness is the real enemy these days. The black groups want to control our thinking and you can't say certain things. The homosexual groups don't want you to criticize them. It's thought control and freedom of speech control."

They had cancel culture in the 90s too.

Re: ChatGPT Pulse

#743

Post by astrange »

ethbr1 wrote: post #717
astrange wrote: post #714

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One of those involves fulltime professionals backed by state violence and the other is when people on social media are mad at you.

Isn't the only difference whether the censors are in or out of government power? Few now respect the wisdom of 'should not' even when 'can'

That difference is so big it makes it an entirely different thing.

Re: ChatGPT Pulse

#744

Post by ycombigators »

tbossanova wrote: post #730
moralestapia wrote: post #583

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes. Why would you write down "Buy Milk", then go buy whatever thing you call milk, then come back home and be confused about it? Only an imbecile would get stuck in such a thing.

Well, I think in this example someone else wrote down “buy milk”. Of course I would generally know what that’s likely to mean, and not buy the ridiculous thing. But someone from a culture that’s not used to using milk could easily get confused and buy the wrong thing, to further the example. I guess my point was that it’s never possible to completely unambiguously define when a task is done without assuming some amou…

[dead]

Re: ChatGPT Pulse

#745

Post by neya »

neumann wrote: post #469
neya wrote: post #448

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> AI is a powerful tool for those who are willing to put in the work. HN crowd is generally anti-AI, so you're not going to get a lot of positive feedback here. As a developer and someone who runs my own company, AI helps save me tons of hours - especially with research tasks, code audits - just to see if I've missed something, rapid frontend interface development and so much more if we go beyond the realm of just co…

Rather than anti-AI, I think most of the HN crowd are educated enough about underlying technology and it's capabilities to see the snake oil being pushed. Most of us would have given it a good go (and probably still use it daily), just know the difference between its actual limitations and the dreams that are being sold.

Is it really snake oil if it actually has meaningful time savings? Dismissing AI completely off as just snake oil seems to be extreme.

Re: ChatGPT Pulse

#746

Post by coffeeindex »

astrange wrote: post #742
jayGlow wrote: post #725

Earlier quoted context omitted.

he's been dead for a decade so I doubt he now wants the meaning to be anything. besides that he also never said anything about cancel culture he said it's about how tv turns you into a moron. https://www.openculture.com/2017/08/ray-bradbury-reveals-the...

> In a 1994 interview, Bradbury stated that Fahrenheit 451 was more relevant during this time than in any other, stating that, "it works even better because we have political correctness now. Political correctness is the real enemy these days. The black groups want to control our thinking and you can't say certain things. The homosexual groups don't want you to criticize them. It's thought control and freedom of spee…

> you can’t say certain things

So he sees it as another form of censorship

Re: ChatGPT Pulse

#747

Post by blks »

lxgr wrote: post #241
blks wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Often someone’s personal productivity with AI means someone else have to dig through their piles of rubbish to review PR they committed. In your particular case it sounds like you’re rapidly loosing your developer skills, and enjoy that now you have to put less effort and think less.

Another way of viewing it would be that LLMs allow software developers to focus their development skills where it actually matters (correctness, architecture etc.), rather than wasting hours catering to the framework or library of the day’s configuration idiosyncrasies. That stuff kills my motivation to solve actual problems like nothing else. Being able to send off an agent to e.g. fix some build script bug so that…

You still have to review and understand changes that your “AI agent” did. If you don’t review and fully understand everything it does, then I fear for your project.

Re: ChatGPT Pulse

#748

Post by mathgeek »

achierius wrote: post #256
ip26 wrote: post #238

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It doesn't have to be that way of course. You could envision an LLM whose "paperclip" is coaching you to become a great "xyz". Record every minute of your day, including your conversations. Feed it to the LLM. It gives feedback on what you did wrong, refuses to be your social outlet, and demands you demonstrate learning in the next day before it rewards with more attention. Basically, a fanatically devoted life coach…

If that were truly the LLM's "paperclip", then how far would it be willing to go? Would it engage in cyber-crime to surreptitiously smooth your path? Would it steal? Would it be willing to hurt other people? What if you no longer want to be a great "xyz"? What if you decide you want to turn it off (which would prevent it from following through on its goal)? "The market" is not magic. "The challenge is the incentives"…

> If that were truly the LLM's "paperclip", then how far would it be willing to go?

While I'm assuming you didn't mean it literally, language is important, so let's remember that an LLM does not have any will of its own. It's a predictive engine that we can be certain doesn't have free will (which of course is still up for debate about humans). I only focus on that because folks easily make the jump to "the computer is to blame, not me or the folks who programmed it, and certainly it wasn't just statistics" when it comes to LLMs.

Re: ChatGPT Pulse

#749

Post by oofbey »

sebastiennight wrote: post #510
oofbey wrote: post #220

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A key point of the Turing Test was to stop the debates over what constitutes intelligence or not and define something objectively measurable. Here we are again. If a model has a statistical tendency to recommend python scripts over bash, is that a PREFERENCE? Argue it’s not alive and doesn’t have feelings all you want. But putting that aside, it prefers python. Saying the word preference is meaningless is just pedant…

Would you say that dice have a preference for landing on numbers larger than 2? because I've noticed they tend to do so about two-thirds of the time.

I would. Certainly if somebody asked me which way dice have a preference to land, over two or not, I’d say “over two” and not say “that’s a stupid question because dice don’t have opinions”. But to each their own.

Try explaining ionic bonds to a high schooler without anthropomorphising atoms and their desires for electrons. And then ask yourself why you’re doing that? It’s easier to say and understand with the analogy.

Re: ChatGPT Pulse

#750

Post by johanyc »

redbell wrote: post #352

Here's the announcement from Atlman: https://x.com/sama/status/1971297661748953263 Quoted from that tweet: > It performs super well if you tell ChatGPT more about what's important to you . In regular chat, you could mention “I’d like to go visit Bora Bora someday” or “My kid is 6 months old and I’m interested in developmental milestones” and in the future you might get useful updates. At this point in time, I'd say:…

I don't consider this an invasion of privacy when it's you who tell chatpgt. It's just a like personal assistant. For it to be helpful, it has to know something about you. And you decide what you are willing to tell chatpgt.
Post reply on HN