4 ms·

I'm not. I think it's awesome and I can't wait to see what comes out next. And I'm completely OK with all of my work being used to train models. Bunch of lud

I'm not. I think it's awesome and I can't wait to see what comes out next. And I'm completely OK with all of my work being used to train models. Bunch of luddites and sour grapes around here on HN these days.

elpocko 2y ago
Same here! Amazing stuff that I have waited for my entire life, and I won't let luddite haters ruin it for me. Their impotent rage is tiring but in the end it's just one more thing you have to ignore.
- fallingknife 2y ago
  Yeah, they made something that passes a Turing test, and people on HN of all places hate it? What happened to this place? It's like the number one thing people hate around here now is another man's success. I won't ignore them. I'll continue to loudly disagree with the losers and proudly collect downvotes from them knowing I got under their skin.
  - Applejinx 2y ago
    Eliza effectively passed Turing tests. I think you gotta do a little better than that, and 'ha ha I made you mad' isn't actually the best defense of your position.
    - elpocko 2y ago
      Eliza did not pass Turing tests in any reasonable capacity. It took anyone 10 seconds to realize what it was doing; no one was fooled by it. The comparison to modern LLMs is preposterous. GP doesn't have to defend their position. They like something, and they don't shut up about it even though it makes a bunch of haters mad. That's good; no defense required. On the contrary: those who get mad need to defend themselves.
      - Applejinx 2y ago
        I mean even on the Wikipedia article it says: "Some of ELIZA's responses were so convincing that Weizenbaum and several others have anecdotes of users becoming emotionally attached to the program, occasionally forgetting that they were conversing with a computer.[3] Weizenbaum's own secretary reportedly asked Weizenbaum to leave the room so that she and ELIZA could have a real conversation. Weizenbaum was surprised by this, later writing: 'I had not realized ... that extremely short exposures to a relatively simple computer program could induce powerful delusional thinking in quite normal people.'" That's why I said it passed the Turing test. It did, in the wild. I think if you set up an adversarial Turing test it'd fare much more poorly, but consider this: anyone dealing with it knew they were dealing with a computer, not just 'text from a mystery messager in another room'. So in a sense it more than passed the Turing test, in that people started out knowing it was not a person, yet began to treat it as one anyhow. This is more about how little it takes to pass a Turing test and be treated as intelligence… which is mighty salient to discussions of what we now call 'AI'. Some of you are taking today's Eliza mighty seriously.
        elpocko 2y ago
        I must have been about 8 years old when I played Eliza for the first time on some home computer. Even to a dumb kid it was very obvious how it worked, two questions in. And I am far from being a genius. Maybe it was more convincing in English than in my native language, but "delusional thinking" seems about right. Tbh, I don't care about Turing tests, or the AI narrative of big corps or doomers. I do care about my personal experience with LLMs and diffusion models. Not in a mighty serious way, but in mighty fun and entertaining way that wasn't possible before.
- yannis 2y ago
  Absolutely amazing stuff. I am now three scores and ten in my life time, seen a lot of changes from slide rules->very fast to calculators->very fast to pcs, from dot matrix printers to lazer jets and dozens of other things. Wish AI was available when I was doing my PhD. If you know its limitations it can be very useful. At present I occasionally use it to translate references from wikipedia articles to bibtex format. It is very good at this, I only need to fix a few minor errors, letting me focus to the core of what I am doing. But human nature always resists change, especially if it leads to the unknown. I must admit that I think AI will bring negative consequences as it will be misused by politicians and the military, they need to be "regulated" not the AI.
Kiro 2y ago
You're getting downvoted, but I agree with your last sentence — and not just about AI. The amount of negativity here regarding almost everything is appalling. Maybe it's rose-tinted nostalgia but I don't remember it being like this a few years ago.
- CaptainFever 2y ago
  Hacker News used to be nicknamed Hater News, as I recall.
amiantos 2y ago
There's _a lot_ of poor quality engineers out there who understand that on some level they are committing fraud by spinning their wheels all day shifting CSS values around on a React component while collecting large paychecks. I think it's only natural all of those engineers are terrified by the prospect of some computer being capable of doing their job quickly and efficiently and replacing them. Those people are crying so loudly that it's encouraging otherwise normal people to start jumping on the anti-AI bandwagon too, because their voices are so loud people can't hear themselves think critically anymore. I think passionate and inspired engineers who love their job and have very solid soft skills and experience working deeply on complex software projects will always have a position in the industry, and people like that are understandably very enthusiastic about AI instead of being scared of it. In other words, it is weird how bad the status quo was, until we got something that really threatened the status quo, now a lot of the people who wanted to tear it all down are now desperately trying to stop everything from changing. The sentiment on the internet has gone in a weird direction, but it's all about money deep down. This hypothetical new status quo brought on by AI seems to be wedded to fears of less money, thus abject terror masquerading as "I'm so bored!" posturing. You see this in the art circles, where established artists are willing to embrace AI, but it's the small time aspiring bedroom artists that have not achieved any success who are all over Twitter denouncing AI art as soulless and terrible. While the real artists are too busy using any tool available to make art, or are just making art because they want to make art and aren't concerned with fear-mongering.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]

elpocko 2y ago

Same here! Amazing stuff that I have waited for my entire life, and I won't let luddite haters ruin it for me. Their impotent rage is tiring but in the end it's just one more thing you have to ignore.

fallingknife 2y ago
Yeah, they made something that passes a Turing test, and people on HN of all places hate it? What happened to this place? It's like the number one thing people hate around here now is another man's success. I won't ignore them. I'll continue to loudly disagree with the losers and proudly collect downvotes from them knowing I got under their skin.
- Applejinx 2y ago
  Eliza effectively passed Turing tests. I think you gotta do a little better than that, and 'ha ha I made you mad' isn't actually the best defense of your position.
  - elpocko 2y ago
    Eliza did not pass Turing tests in any reasonable capacity. It took anyone 10 seconds to realize what it was doing; no one was fooled by it. The comparison to modern LLMs is preposterous. GP doesn't have to defend their position. They like something, and they don't shut up about it even though it makes a bunch of haters mad. That's good; no defense required. On the contrary: those who get mad need to defend themselves.
    - Applejinx 2y ago
      I mean even on the Wikipedia article it says: "Some of ELIZA's responses were so convincing that Weizenbaum and several others have anecdotes of users becoming emotionally attached to the program, occasionally forgetting that they were conversing with a computer.[3] Weizenbaum's own secretary reportedly asked Weizenbaum to leave the room so that she and ELIZA could have a real conversation. Weizenbaum was surprised by this, later writing: 'I had not realized ... that extremely short exposures to a relatively simple computer program could induce powerful delusional thinking in quite normal people.'" That's why I said it passed the Turing test. It did, in the wild. I think if you set up an adversarial Turing test it'd fare much more poorly, but consider this: anyone dealing with it knew they were dealing with a computer, not just 'text from a mystery messager in another room'. So in a sense it more than passed the Turing test, in that people started out knowing it was not a person, yet began to treat it as one anyhow. This is more about how little it takes to pass a Turing test and be treated as intelligence… which is mighty salient to discussions of what we now call 'AI'. Some of you are taking today's Eliza mighty seriously.
      - elpocko 2y ago
        I must have been about 8 years old when I played Eliza for the first time on some home computer. Even to a dumb kid it was very obvious how it worked, two questions in. And I am far from being a genius. Maybe it was more convincing in English than in my native language, but "delusional thinking" seems about right. Tbh, I don't care about Turing tests, or the AI narrative of big corps or doomers. I do care about my personal experience with LLMs and diffusion models. Not in a mighty serious way, but in mighty fun and entertaining way that wasn't possible before.
yannis 2y ago
Absolutely amazing stuff. I am now three scores and ten in my life time, seen a lot of changes from slide rules->very fast to calculators->very fast to pcs, from dot matrix printers to lazer jets and dozens of other things. Wish AI was available when I was doing my PhD. If you know its limitations it can be very useful. At present I occasionally use it to translate references from wikipedia articles to bibtex format. It is very good at this, I only need to fix a few minor errors, letting me focus to the core of what I am doing. But human nature always resists change, especially if it leads to the unknown. I must admit that I think AI will bring negative consequences as it will be misused by politicians and the military, they need to be "regulated" not the AI.

Kiro 2y ago

You're getting downvoted, but I agree with your last sentence — and not just about AI. The amount of negativity here regarding almost everything is appalling. Maybe it's rose-tinted nostalgia but I don't remember it being like this a few years ago.

CaptainFever 2y ago
Hacker News used to be nicknamed Hater News, as I recall.

amiantos 2y ago

There's _a lot_ of poor quality engineers out there who understand that on some level they are committing fraud by spinning their wheels all day shifting CSS values around on a React component while collecting large paychecks. I think it's only natural all of those engineers are terrified by the prospect of some computer being capable of doing their job quickly and efficiently and replacing them. Those people are crying so loudly that it's encouraging otherwise normal people to start jumping on the anti-AI bandwagon too, because their voices are so loud people can't hear themselves think critically anymore. I think passionate and inspired engineers who love their job and have very solid soft skills and experience working deeply on complex software projects will always have a position in the industry, and people like that are understandably very enthusiastic about AI instead of being scared of it. In other words, it is weird how bad the status quo was, until we got something that really threatened the status quo, now a lot of the people who wanted to tear it all down are now desperately trying to stop everything from changing. The sentiment on the internet has gone in a weird direction, but it's all about money deep down. This hypothetical new status quo brought on by AI seems to be wedded to fears of less money, thus abject terror masquerading as "I'm so bored!" posturing. You see this in the art circles, where established artists are willing to embrace AI, but it's the small time aspiring bedroom artists that have not achieved any success who are all over Twitter denouncing AI art as soulless and terrible. While the real artists are too busy using any tool available to make art, or are just making art because they want to make art and aren't concerned with fear-mongering.

deleted 2y ago
[deleted]