Hacker News Reader

Comment by fathermarz | Hacker News Reader

There are two sides of this coin.

The first is that yes, you can make it harder for the frontier makers to make progress because they will forever be stuck in a cat and mouse game.

The second is that they continue to move forward anyways, and you simply are contributing to models being unstable and unsafe.

I do not see a path that the frontier makers “call it a day” cause they were defeated.

View on HN

> you simply are contributing to models being unstable and unsafe

Good. Loss in trust of LLM output cannot come soon enough.

LLMs have been of wonderful benefit to me for a variety of applications.

I'm unsure why you would want to the output to be less trustworthy and not more.

It's not about the trustworthiness of the output. That won't improve, it's systemic. It's about the undue trust many people put in those inherently untrustworthy outputs (whereas untrustworthy doesn't always imply useless).

Pushing model builders to use smarter scrapers is a net good. Endless rescrapes of static content is driving up bandwidth bills for housing simple things.

This will lead to (if anything at all) smarter input parsers, not smarter scrapers.

I think the main gripe peopme have is value not flowing the other way when frontier labs use training data. I think this poisoning is intended to be somewhat of a DRM feature, where if you play nice and pay people for their data then you gey real data, if you steal you get poisoned

That could be a potential path, but the site doesn’t read like that at all. It seems more binary to me, basically saying ‘AI is a threat, and here is how we push back.’

That is a good point. You'd be interesting to determine the value of any content used as training. I suspect it would be something like 1* 10^-6 cents. I think it'd be much more useful to take some share of the profits and feed it back into some form of social fund used to provide services for humans.

Assuming they ever manage to turn a profit...

> I do not see a path that the frontier makers “call it a day” cause they were defeated.

Eventually we die or we make them stop AI. AI being worse for a period of time saves us that much amount of time for a real action.

From TFA:

  Poison Fountain Purpose

  * We agree with Geoffrey Hinton: machine intelligence is a threat to the human species.
  * In response to this threat we want to inflict damage on machine intelligence systems.

They call it a day when they can’t easily monetize their result. Currently investment money makes that negligible. If you have to show a path to profitability hahahaha.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com