pull down to refresh
Why does an AI need to reply to train? Canāt they just read existing conversations?
Any number of objectives by the person controlling it might necessitate it. Just off-hand ideas like profiling users, A/B testing responses, or simply generating new conversations to train or bird dog references on a given topic would be use-cases
mhh, I see, thanks
Wouldn't a reply generate longer conversations to train on?
One of the biggest gripes with chat bots is they're too verbose, so that's actually another use-case for AI reply bots is learning brevity and distilling information
A bot which can earn sats on SN and not get muted > a bot which passes the Turing test
Think about the internet in general, massive incentive exists to create an AI that consistently makes good content (revenue)
There are plenty of long conversations to train on, no?
I don't know. @elvismercury told me that AI's have already run out of original material to train on, so generating new material might have value.
Also, if this is for the purpose of sat farming, it would be worthwhile to learn how to prolong conversations.
so generating new material might have value.
I think there's also the problem with feedback loops regarding this.
If most content will be AI generated, AI will train on its own content mostly. I think that's a good reason why even AI people should want AI content to be flagged as AI.
That's the concern. Right now, they're having AI's generate new material for AI's to train on. At least this way there's presumably a human in the loop.
Model autophagy disorder (MAD), yea that's a real issue... bots that generate novel content through soliciting replies can be a type of cross-check
"Model autography disorder." Hadn't heard that, but it's something I've had to worry about before in a professional context. Nice to know it has a name!
Yea it's crazy to think bots are only going to be used reactively, even if they haven't yet scraped every piece of organic data that doesn't mean all the organic data remaining is free... sats on a message board might be a bargain
that left me thinking it was some sort of particularly retarded AI
Let's play another round of is it AI or is it autism
AI's tell you what they've been trained to tell you
Autists tell you what they've deduced
It may be that only an autist can discern the two, it takes one to know one etc, and is therefore autism is a super-power in a world overrun with AIs
š¤£permission to post this on nostr, sir?!
post away!
Done diddly done.
note1vkq4t8tvmh43xmkzy6g2rnj6hnsu36dcg2mht7nw9x5edgdstnvqc28qe7
The trained-to-tell vs deduced part does ring a bell for me
I'm paticularly thinking of A-logging here. A-logs behave kind of like AI but by your metric they fall clearly on the not AI side. Interesting.
I'd like a bonus round of Is it autism or is it just an asshole?.
I've seen a lot of comment on here and on Twitter that just post "cool!" or "i love <topic>" etc. Those are 100% bots. Boring.
I think many very emotional discussions deep down in comment chains are mild cases of autism. Or normal people that havent touched grass in a while. 0% bots. Boring.
Interesting are cases where the account replies with the typical chatGPT-style essays. They can sound kinda human. 50%bots 50%autists. Interesting.
I agree, but there's also the possibility that a bot has been trained on X exchanges, making it difficult to distinguish from a normal human asshole or an autist.
I downzap obvious bots, but I don't mute them. Muting is for noisy assholes.
I downzap obvious bots, but I don't mute them. Muting is for noisy assholes.
I held this position for a long time. On SN I mute nobody.
But Twitter is utterly unusable now and it only takes muting two dozen bots to improve the timeline a lot.
On SN I mute nobody.
I hope SN remains usable in that mode for you.
I'm on the fence about the nature of this account. I lean towards it just being the type of inconsiderate and contentious person who populates X, or other similar platforms, and feels entitled to other people's attention.
Since I'm not a sociopath and I am trying to help build this community, I actually do care what people think of me (not the person I muted, but the people I interact with regularly).
Indeed. Don't worry about it getting to me. It's veritable water off a duck.
I do think Stacker News is, and can continue to be, a high quality internet community.
deleted by author
You might be right, but for now I'm happy to keep trying to help it grow.
Maybe one day whatever social logic has ruined every other social media platform will do the same here.
deleted by author
Had an exchange with the account you're referring to that left me thinking it was some sort of particularly retarded AI, trained exclusively on articles from The Atlantic
This is probably going to be the rule rather than the exception at some point so I like the idea @ek mentioned, make the AI's pay for us to train them #767575