Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | result2vino's commentslogin

I feel like taking Google’s commitment to something seriously is one of this things that I can very uncontroversially respond to with “is this your first day?”

All but the biggest Google fanboys know that Google is incredibly indecisive and will cut plans at a moment’s notice.


I come to HN for better discussions without such infantile retorts.


Arguing? Christ. Is that what we call “stating that it’s possible that…”. Not everything is a hill to die on.


> 2 years before it was VR, few years before that NFTs and blockchain everything

Are you so deep in the SV tech echo chamber that you can’t distinguish between tech bro / snake oil salesman hype and something that actual normal people are engaged by?

The only people talking about NFTs in a non-disparaging way were delusional in large part because they themselves bought into it wanted to egg others on. NFTs were just a stupid faddish speculative ‘commodity’ market. It’s a completely different thing.

Ditto with “blockchain”. That well was positioned by people trying to make money from cryptocurrencies. The mechanics allowed for that. Again, it’s a completely different thing. Civilians with no vested interest weren’t sitting in restaurants singing the praises of decentralised ledgers or monkey pictures on someone’s Google Drive. I assure you. I also assure you that this IS however happening with ChatGPT. Out here in the real world, we see it.

This doesn’t mean that there aren’t issues with LLMs, both philosophically and in therms of their actual output. This doesn’t mean there aren’t the same old SV snake oil salespeople and YouTube wannabes trying to push some BS products and courses. But let’s not pretend for a second like this is usefully comparable to “blockchain” and “NFTs”.


I think that underestimates public engagements in these hypes. Billions were wasted by "normal" people worldwide on VR headsets, in-game nfts, and shitcoins. Real world money, not some inflated VC capital projections. And while the current LLMs still are an "advanced Eliza", regular people are quite happy to pay for its services.


I am sorry, every A-List celebrity was shilling a NFT project, from superbowl to other public spheres of discourse seemed all crypto. The future president of the country has a crypto project to sell, I don’t see how much mainstream it can get.

Yes, There is close connection to SV hype cycle and what happens in mainstream, most mainstream ones originate in SV but the ones I mentioned specifically impacted the larger public not just SV tech sphere


Blockchain and NFT took over the Super Bowl. That's pretty mainstream. There are Bitcoin ATMs.


Let’s peel away facade of the rhetorical questions here and look at what you’re actually saying. Now, a massive, MASSIVE [[citation needed]] is in order.


That's not how this works. The questions I asked were not rhetorical and almost entirely subjective. Citations aren't necessary.


This particularly americanised brand of nihilism is so bloody tiring.


Wow. Pedantry that almost intentionally misses the point.


Why do you think that it’s in the national news!? Can you please re-state your actual view because I’m really not sure of it anymore.


Something that can be read 10k kilometers away from the school by people who never met the kid.


Yes. It’s clearly plagiarism. Your reply is clearly grasping at the furthest of straws in an attempt to be contrarian and add another “stochastic parrot hehe!” comment to the already overflowing pile. Line up 100 people and the only ones agreeing with you are other wannabe contrarians.


I truly don't understand the tone of your comment.

I'm not grasping at the furthest of straws, I see a distinction between 'verbatim copying someone else's work' and 'verbatim copying the results of a tool that produces text'.


Plagerism isn’t the copying part, it’s the part where you claim to be the author of something you are not the author of. Hope that helps to clear up things. You can plagerism content that your are both legally and ethically allowed to copy. It doesn’t matter the least bit. If you claim to be the author of content you didn’t author and lack attribution AI or otherwise then you’re plagering the content.


> A translation tool like DeepL is presumably trained on a huge amount of 'other people's work'. Is copying its result verbatim into your own work also plagiarism then?

Yes, if you present yourself as its author.


So let's say you are not a native English speaker and write a passage of your paper in your native language, then let DeepL translate this and paste the result into your paper, without a note or citation. Is that plagiarism?


the tool actually produces text… of someone else’s work… that you then copy… verbatim… :)


But the text itself is not someone else's work verbatim.

A translation tool like DeepL is presumably trained on a huge amount of 'other people's work'. Is copying its result verbatim into your own work also plagiarism then?


plagiarism - by definition - is copying someone else’s work.

the easier definition is “did YOU write this?” if answer is no - you plagiarised it and should be punished to the full extent.


'Someone else's work' -- exactly. Not 'the output of some tool'.

I'm not saying what the guy did wasn't wrong or dumb, I'm saying: Plagiarism has a strict definition, and I don't think it can be applied to the case of directly copying the output of an LLM -- because plagiarism refers to copying the work of another author, and I don't think LLMs are generally regarded (so far) as being able to have this kind of 'authorhood'.


plagiarism does NOT refer to copying the work of another author, it refers to you submitting work as yours that you didn’t yourself write.

if I copy entire article from the Economist, did I plagiarize!? There is no author attribution so we don’t know the author… Many articles in media today are LLM generated (fully or partially), can I copy those if someone sticks there name as author?!

bottom line is - you didn’t do the work but copied it from elsewhere, you plagiarized it, period


I'll just link here to another comment I made that sums up my argument quite well, I think:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42246168


Christ. Some people are willing to believe anything when it affirms their baseless beliefs. You’ve taken some reply that was about another situation entirely and let it convince you. I can think of multiple more likely explanations. Enough for this to at least be in the “who knows?” bucket.


Ye I had a revelation about something totally unrelated, when reading about one KPI hack, that the Reddit load new page upon clicking expand comment, also most likely is one.

What would be a good reason for that, that is not KPI hacking? The extra text is bogger all bandwidth wise.


Social networks hook users in with the one little trick ... click here to find out why you should be using it too.


No they don’t. That’s untrue. The fact that so many replies are speaking as if it’s true is quite telling. Instagram continually pesters me to create a Threads account, but doesn’t just “make one for me”. Threads’ user growth would look very very different if this were true. It’s another app. Instagram won’t even let you expand one of the stupid Threads posts it shows you until you install the app.


What we learned from the IE & Chrome periods of historical browser dominance is that defaults matter, and tying (specifically an anti-competitive move) works.

Facebook is doing the same with Threads. Sure you don't have a default account, but the pestering works, and it is "tying".


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: