Hacker News Reader

> Maybe if all you ever exchanged with someone was a few sentences about inconsequential stuff.

Like usually on HN, you give humans too much credit. Most people never exchange anything else with anyone but inconsequential stuff. IRL and online. The AI will give itself away by being too eager to write content and too grammatically/semantically correct and not random and inconsistent enough.

Go to some places (instagram is pretty good for that) where people basically only communicate in emoji's and memes and where every sentence longer than 4 words is misunderstood because no-one actually has reading comprehension.

> Right now the performance of ChatGPT in your average discord chat room would be absolutely awful.

Most of the internet, including many discord channels are already absolutely awful.

So yeah, it is a problem; for me, most people responding outside a few discord channels, subreddits, lobsters and hn, it's already bots or humans that could as well be bots anyway. And only a matter of time before it takes over those few places that are still ok.

I will probably move to meetups offline more and more. The opposite of what I did my whole life.

Spelling mistakes can easily be added, as can reply delays. I think the mainstream will soon realize that Sybil resistance is not just important but essential for any forum or social network in the future. We need ways to ID users as humans, preferably in a way that preserves privacy for those who do not want to have their real identity linked to random internet comments.

You can do KYC with a KYC specialized company and agree on some way of not having the social media company getting hold of that info, just ‘user4639284757483858 is a real human and they are not already on your platform’.

Until they get hacked and your entire identity is leaked, not just Facebook and HN but all other accounts, linked to your government issued ID or SSN.

> Most people never exchange anything else with anyone but inconsequential stuff. IRL and online.

If my interaction with them is that shallow, does it matter if they are real or a bot?

No, that’s kind of my point. It doesn’t matter for most people, so there will be some (futile) resistance and that is it.

The problem is when AIs become such high quality that they can influence people’s minds and behaviours through psychological tricks. This is also already happening but mostly humans are creating that content which is upvoted and responded to by their bots.

This is going to be AI soon-ish and that is a problem imho. But not something we will be able to do much about except KYC people as rigoureus as banks do (bye bye privacy, unless this is implemented well) or making them pay to post. Both won’t kill all bots, but will shrink the reach of them as suddenly it’s a very costly affair to do at scale (buying real people and paying to post).

> ChatGPT isn't even close to being able to consistently act like a single human being with interests, plenty of long term memory, and a life outside a chat room.

Is it really not close, or just not done yet? They're already using human feedback loops to get it as good as it is generally, is it a huge step to then allow personalised feedback loops so that the local instance remembers its own "personality"? (I'm not an expert so maybe that is a huge, unrelated leap in a way that I can't see?)

It's not complicated to explain. The model can handle 4000 tokens at once. So all you can do is work with the limitations of this window. You can use part of it to quote the previous interactions, and part of it for the response. If your content is too large, you need to summarise it. There are AIs for that too. If the output is too large, you need to split it in multiple rounds. It is pretty hard to work around this limitation, for example to write a whole novel.

I think we need LLMs capable of reading a whole book at once, about 100K tokens. I hope they can innovate the memory system of transformers a bit, there are ideas and papers, but they don't seem to get attention.

Sure, that is chatGPT in late 2022.

What about Open.ChatGPT in mid 2024?

Is there a "law of tokens" growth for LLMs, ala Moore's Law, but for LLM capabilities based upon token capacity?

Complexity is quadratic in sequence length. For 512 tokens it is 262K, but for 4000 tokens it becomes 16M and goes OOM on a single GPU. We need about 100K-1M tokens to load whole books at once.

Since 2017 there have been hundreds of attempts to bring O(N^2) to O(N), but none of them replaced the vanilla attention yet in large models. They lose on accuracy. Maybe Flash attention has a shot (https://arxiv.org/abs/2205.14135).

You are focusing on the application not on the capability. ChatGPT was trained for a different purpose so if you used it for discord it would be recognizable.

Not unlike a person that wrote newspaper articles all his life and now has to use discord.

If you trained it on discord messages it would probably be indistinguishable from most discord users.

> If you trained it on discord messages it would probably be indistinguishable from most discord users.

You might get an average of all discord users, or all discord users at once. Neither would seem like a real person.

For instance someone who is interested in and capable of talking about any topic will not look real. A normal discord user will not contribute to conversations they don't care about or know nothing about.

After 10-messages-long discussion - probably (I'm not sure but let's say you're right). But you won't have 10-messages-long discussion with anybody if there's 1010 users and 10 of them are human.

AFAIR discord requires phone number, and that's the main reason spam isn't a problem, so maybe we're already there.

> But you won't have 10-messages-long discussion with anybody if there's 1010 users and 10 of them are human.

In such a place it doesn't really matter whether anyone is real, does it? You're probably there to get a few laughs or something, not build relationships with people.

Though there's more serious places with real people. Off the top of my head there's two large discord servers I'm active in: One is to find people to play a certain video game with, the other is a community of developers who use somewhat niche technology and probe each other's brains for knowledge that often can't be found on the internet. In either community a chat bot would be immediately obvious.

I'm using discord a lot, I'm on around 20 servers. Most of them are in the 10-50 users range and they are for specific purpose (like playing D&D or computer games, remote working in a small team, talking with a group of friends). These won't be affected cause they are invite-only.

Then there are 1000+ users open servers - usually for developing some open source projects or talking about $RANDOM_HOBBY. These would definitely be affected if not for the requirement of giving your phone number to access discord.

You can imagine the problems that 1000 bots posting proceduraly generated bug reports could cause :)

It will probably look like a proper conversation until you start looking at the usernames.

> ChatGPT isn't even close to being able to consistently act like a single human being with interests, plenty of long term memory, and a life outside a chat room.

Wait until GPT4 comes out next year...

Whatever helps you sleep at night.