←back to thread

Auto-grading decade-old Hacker News discussions with hindsight

(karpathy.bearblog.dev)
615 points __rito__ | 2 comments | 10 Dec 25 17:23 UTC | HN request time: 0.389s | source

Related from yesterday: Show HN: Gemini Pro 3 imagines the HN front page 10 years from now - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46205632
Show context
collinmcnulty ◴[10 Dec 25 18:50 UTC] No.46221809[source]▶
> But if intelligence really does become too cheap to meter, it will become possible to do a perfect reconstruction and synthesis of everything. LLMs are watching (or humans using them might be). Best to be good.

I cannot believe this is just put out there unexamined of any level of "maybe we shouldn't help this happen". This is complete moral abdication. And to be clear, being "good" is no defense. Being good often means being unaligned with the powerful, so being good is often the very thing that puts you in danger.

replies(5): >>46221981 #>>46222014 #>>46222133 #>>46222642 #>>46224955 #
1. cootsnuck ◴[10 Dec 25 19:44 UTC] No.46222642[source]▶
To be clear...prior to this recent explosive interest in LLMs, this was already true. Snowden was over 10 years ago.

We can't start clutching our pearls now as if programmatic mass surveillance hasn't been running on all cylinders for over 20 years.

Don't get me wrong, we should absolutely care about this, everyone should. I'm just saying any vague gestures at imminent privacy-doom thanks to LLMs is liable to be doing some big favors of inadvertently sanitizing the history of prior (and still) egregious privacy offenders.

I'm just suggesting more "Yes and" and less "pearl clutching" is all.

replies(1): >>46223479 #
2. panarky ◴[10 Dec 25 20:40 UTC] No.46223479[source]▶
Who, exactly, is the "we" who you see "pearl clutching" instead of "yes and-ing"?