Hacker News Reader

Comment by css_apologist | Hacker News Reader

cost, and we can create policy (shocker)

also what specifically are you worried about these 100 billion chatgpts doing?

The comment I was responding to said that protocols would solve the problems with AI. I immediately imagined telling my $10/month unlimited AI to hook itself up to whatever protocol is being discussed here.

They mentioned identity being important here. I'm not sure what that means in this context (some kind of cryptographic verification, maybe?), but the part that seems relevant to me has to do with trust. Either a person is trusted by people I trust, or at least an organization I trust makes some claim about this person (e.g. they're actually human, this is actually their real name etc.)

I think we'll be seeing something like that in the mainstream in the not too distant future, for obvious reasons.

Cost is irrelevant if they get more out of doing it than the processing costs.

Do they get more out of it than it costs, or are they still in the "people are just giving us money in the hopes that one day it turns a profit even though we're not charging nearly enough to make a profit" phase?

You're describing the AI companies and their business model.

I'm answering to that cost being a problem regarding "what prevents 100 Billion ChatGPTs from using any protocol?" - the context I have in mind for the above being scammers, political manipulators, spam, and people like that using ChatGPT/LLMs to take advantage of various protocols for profit (and the 100 billion figure being a figure of speech meaning "very many").

Reply on news.ycombinator.com