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

Humanness in the Age of AI

worldcoin.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 101 posts

Re: Humanness in the Age of AI

#81

Post by 93po »

jstanley wrote: post #58
latexr wrote: post #41

Sam Altman is behind both OpenAI and Worldcoin, the latter being a well known scam to gather biometric data. So Sam Altman first creates the situation that we can no longer distinguish humans from bots, then asks everyone to trust him with even more biometric data to get around the problem he created. Either way he wins at everyone else’s expense. I urge you to not take this at face value, Sam has already shown with…

> we can no longer distinguish humans from bots I was tricked by a machine yesterday. I had to call up the bank because their online banking website had booted me out. After only a couple of rings, and no hold music, I was straight through to a person! This is unprecedented. The call was something like: "Hi, you're through to foobank. How can I help you today?" "Hi, your online banking has locked me out and said I ne…

thankfully i bet we're only a couple years away from chatgpt making these calls for us. google already has a great "hold for me" function on android, though a lot of companies now detect this and deliberate hang up on you if they know you're using it - and they only hang up once the hold time is over. fuck these companies

Re: Humanness in the Age of AI

#82

Post by 93po »

> It empowers individuals to verify their humanness online while maintaining their anonymity through zero-knowledge proofs. Advancements in AI make it difficult to distinguish between AI and humans on the internet, highlighting a need for authentic human recognition and verification.

I am absolutely relieved to see this. This is exactly what I've been saying we all need endlessly online for years now. And especially because the internet is about to be overrun with AI generated garbage.

Yes - we need to be cynical with any implementation of this. We need to find flaws and criticize every aspect of it. But we absolutely 100% need this technology if we want online discourse to continue. Reddit is already a hellhole of bots and generated content, and has been getting progressively worse for years.

Re: Humanness in the Age of AI

#83

Post by mandmandam »

pessimizer wrote: post #61
germinalphrase wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why censor Sontag’s statement? However people feel about her statement, she chose those words.

Your instincts are wrong. HN has been a safe place as far as I've ever known (imo you're modded for being unreasonable or irrelevant here - even dumb is fine), but it's not safe to assume that you can say things bluntly in any forum just because they're true and said in good faith. It may read as bravery, but it's really just hubris. They'll delete you and tell other people to delete you. They'll report you to police…

Was recently banned for saying true and important things here.

It's not hubris - it's called having a spine.

Re: Humanness in the Age of AI

#84

Post by capableweb »

ritzaco wrote: post #69
capableweb wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know the exact implementation of Worldcoin, so correct me if I'm wrong here. But theoretically, you could implement the protocol in a privacy-preserving manner where the only thing that needs to be saved, is the hash of the biometric data, not the biometric data itself. So lets say that your face + fingerprint + iris each outputs a value. Concat those and hash them, and you have a unique value that can be rep…

at the point where you regularly have to scan that combination into a potentially malicious or compromised machine that knows how to generate and transmit the hash, you may as well just trust some centralised authority to store the originals. If someone MITMs your password, you can rotate it. A bit harder to do that with your iris. Of course, true for fingerprint scanning too which has been around for a while, but ir…

> at the point where you regularly have to scan that combination into a potentially malicious or compromised machine that knows how to generate and transmit the hash, you may as well just trust some centralised authority to store the originals.

Why would you have to do that regularly? The point is to do it once in a trusted environment and then the only thing you need to verify whatever is the hash itself, not to re-encode again and again.

Re: Humanness in the Age of AI

#85

Post by jstanley »

93po wrote: post #81
jstanley wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> we can no longer distinguish humans from bots I was tricked by a machine yesterday. I had to call up the bank because their online banking website had booted me out. After only a couple of rings, and no hold music, I was straight through to a person! This is unprecedented. The call was something like: "Hi, you're through to foobank. How can I help you today?" "Hi, your online banking has locked me out and said I ne…

thankfully i bet we're only a couple years away from chatgpt making these calls for us. google already has a great "hold for me" function on android, though a lot of companies now detect this and deliberate hang up on you if they know you're using it - and they only hang up once the hold time is over. fuck these companies

Maybe if chatgpt were on the other side of the call it would actually have done what I wanted!

Re: Humanness in the Age of AI

#86

Post by [deleted] »

meowface wrote: post #77
rajin444 wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is that full quote supposed to be better? I’m not sure what’s being addressed here, but that you feel comfortable reiterating that an entire race is cancerous is concerning to say the least. What is the end goal of this rhetoric?

I'm not endorsing Sontag's quote at all. I disagree with her and think it's wrong and immoral to exhibit bigotry towards any race or to cast any sort of group judgment like that in general. Plus if any other race had been in the same position they'd very likely be just as rapacious towards the Earth. I think what she describes is a human problem and not a racial problem. I had just wanted to provide the preceding sen…

[deleted]

Re: Humanness in the Age of AI

#87

Post by [deleted] »

pessimizer wrote: post #61
germinalphrase wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why censor Sontag’s statement? However people feel about her statement, she chose those words.

Your instincts are wrong. HN has been a safe place as far as I've ever known (imo you're modded for being unreasonable or irrelevant here - even dumb is fine), but it's not safe to assume that you can say things bluntly in any forum just because they're true and said in good faith. It may read as bravery, but it's really just hubris. They'll delete you and tell other people to delete you. They'll report you to police…

[deleted]

Re: Humanness in the Age of AI

#88

Post by dang »

mandmandam wrote: post #83
pessimizer wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your instincts are wrong. HN has been a safe place as far as I've ever known (imo you're modded for being unreasonable or irrelevant here - even dumb is fine), but it's not safe to assume that you can say things bluntly in any forum just because they're true and said in good faith. It may read as bravery, but it's really just hubris. They'll delete you and tell other people to delete you. They'll report you to police…

Was recently banned for saying true and important things here. It's not hubris - it's called having a spine.

Why not let people decide for themselves why you were banned?

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34852986

Re: Humanness in the Age of AI

#89

Post by mandmandam »

dang wrote: post #88
mandmandam wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Was recently banned for saying true and important things here. It's not hubris - it's called having a spine.

Why not let people decide for themselves why you were banned? https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34852986

Getting a little passive aggressive there dang.

I hope people do read that, and the context. There's nothing banworthy there, at least from me. Not unless you're a big fan of tptacek running roughshod over people, as you yourself admit he often does.

You also claimed to have "asked me to stop" - which you didn't.

And when I asked you where you said that you didn't reply.

And when I emailed to ask nicely to be unbanned, as you requested, you ignored it.

So... Yeah.

Re: Humanness in the Age of AI

#90

Post by dang »

mandmandam wrote: post #89
dang wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why not let people decide for themselves why you were banned? https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34852986

Getting a little passive aggressive there dang. I hope people do read that, and the context. There's nothing banworthy there, at least from me. Not unless you're a big fan of tptacek running roughshod over people, as you yourself admit he often does. You also claimed to have "asked me to stop" - which you didn't. And when I asked you where you said that you didn't reply. And when I emailed to ask nicely to be unbanne…

> There's nothing banworthy there, at least from me

You were breaking the site guidelines repeatedly in that thread.

> And when I asked you where you said that you didn't reply

Sorry — usually I do reply — I must not have seen https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34856255. FWIW in retrospect, here are some places where we asked you to stop (I don't remember why I used the word 'just' though, since these are older):

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30293928 (Feb 2022)

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28699914 (Sept 2021)

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28650525 (Sept 2021)

> when I emailed to ask nicely to be unbanned, as you requested, you ignored it

I can't find any email that references your username. When did you send it?

Post reply on HN