4 ms·
[flagged]
by threethirtytwo 10mo ago
[flagged]
- nurettin 10mo agoWhy not plan for a future where a lot of non-trivial tasks are automated instead of living on the edge with all this anxiety?
- threethirtytwo 10mo ago[flagged]
- 7777332215 10mo agoIf all of it is going away and you should deny reality, what does everything else you wrote even mean?
- habinero 10mo agoYes, it is simply impossible that anyone could look at things and do your own evaluations and come to a different, much more skeptical conclusion. The only possible explanation is people say things they don't believe out of FUD. Literally the only one.
- undeveloper 10mo agocome out of the irony layer for a second -- what do you believe about LLMs?
- deleted 10mo ago[deleted]
- jorvi 10mo agoI mean.. LLMs have hit a pretty hard wall a while ago, with the only solution being throwing monstrous compute at eking out the remaining few percent improvement (real world, not benchmarks). That's not to mention hallucinations / false paths being a foundational problem. LLMs will continue to get slightly better in the next few years, but mainly a lot more efficient. Which will also mean better and better local models. And grounding might get better, but that just means less wrong answers, not better right answers. So no need for doomerism. The people saying LLMs are a few years away from eating the world are either in on the con or unaware.
- johnfn 10mo agoI suspect this is AI generated, but it’s quite high quality, and doesn’t have any of the telltale signs that most AI generated content does. How did you generate this? It’s great.
- CamperBob2 10mo agoIt's bizarre. The same account was previously arguing in favor of emergent reasoning abilities in another thread ( https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46453084 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46453084 ) -- I voted it up, in fact! Turing test failed, I guess. (edit: fixed link)
- habinero 10mo agoWe need a name for the much more trivial version of the Turing test that replaces "human" with "weird dude with rambling ideas he clearly thinks are very deep" I'm pretty sure it's like "can it run DOOM" and someone could make an LLM that passes this that runs on an pregnancy test
- threethirtytwo 10mo agoI thought the mockery and sarcasm in my piece was rather obvious.
- CamperBob2 10mo agoPoe's Law is the real Bitter Lesson.
- CamperBob2 10mo ago(edit: removed duplicate comment from above, not sure how that happened)
- threethirtytwo 10mo agoIt's a formal sarcasm piece.
- 10mo ago
- magnio 10mo agoPity that HN's ability to detect sarcasm is as robust as that of a sentiment analysis model using keyword-matching.
- furyofantares 10mo agoThe problem is more that it's an LLM-generated comment that's about 20x as long as it needed to be to get the point across.
- threethirtytwo 10mo agoIt's not. Evidence shows otherwise: Despite the "20x" length, many people actually missed the point.
- eru 10mo agoDespite or because?
- _diyar 10mo agoI definitely missed the point because of the length, and only realized after I read replies to your comment.
- threethirtytwo 10mo agoNext time I'll write something shorter, or if you don't believe I wrote it... then I'll tell the AI to write something shorter.
- quinnjh 10mo agoIts not just verbose—it's almost a novel. Parent either cooked and capped, or has managed to perfectly emulate the patterns this parrot is stochastically known best for. I liked the pro human vibe if anything.
- furyofantares 10mo agoOh yeah, there is also a problem with people not noticing they're reading LLM output, AND with people missing sarcasm on here. Actually, I'm OK with people missing sarcasm on here - I have plenty of places to go for sarcasm and wit and it's actually kind of nice to have a place where most posts are sincere, even if that sets people up to miss it when posts are sarcastic. Which is also what makes it problematic that you're lying about your LLM use. I would honestly love to know your prompt and how you iterated on the post, how much you put into it and how much you edited or iterated. Although pretending there was no LLM involved at all is rather disappointing. Unfortunately I think you might feel backed into a corner now that you've insisted otherwise but it's a genuinely interesting thing here that I wish you'd elaborate on.
- eru 10mo ago> This is a relief, honestly. A prior solution exists now, which means the model didn’t solve anything at all. It just regurgitated it from the internet, which we can retroactively assume contained the solution in spirit, if not in any searchable or known form. Mystery resolved. Vs > Interesting that in Terrance Tao's words: "though the new proof is still rather different from the literature proof)"
- catoc 10mo agoI firmly believe @threethirtytwo’s reply was not produced by an LLM
- mkarliner 10mo agoregardless of if this text was written by an LLM or a human, it is still slop,with a human behind it just trying to wind people up . If there is a valid point to be made , it should be made, briefly.
- catoc 10mo agoIf the point was triggering a reply, the length and sarcasm certainly worked. I agree brevity is always preferred. Making a good point while keeping it brief is much harder than rambling on. But length is just a measure, quality determines if I keep reading. If a comment is too long, I won’t finish reading it. If I kept reading, it wasn’t too long.
- rixed 10mo agoAre you expecting people who can't detect self-dellusions to be able to detect sarcasm, or are you just being cruel?
- deleted 10mo ago[deleted]