Re:APIs for content sites must be free
by PaulHoule on Wednesday June 14, 2023 @03:05PM
(#36330945)
Really? The average discussion on Reddit/StackOverflow/etc is full of wrong answers and it is hit or miss if the "accepted" answer is correct, never mind any of the other ones. These sites are a great model for convincing bullshit but if you wanted something worth training an A.I. you'd need to filter out 90% of the content.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Sadly very true. Most threads are very comparable to ChatGPT 3.5. I think one could recreate Reddit mostly with a LLM.
Yea, the future of public discussions online is interesting to consider. LLM bots are already a thing, comments posted here could be from a bot. We don't have a way to really confirm it, and I am not sure it actually matters (yet).
Reddit probably was a pretty big part of LLM training data. It has a vast trove of conversation on niche topics, and pairings of "what is said in response to input X". Probably the monetisation of the API is an attempt to capitalize on those users.
Re:APIs for content sites must be free
by jamietanna on Wednesday June 14, 2023 @04:40PM
(#36332297)
Fortunately /r/SubredditSimulator has been a thing for a while https://www.engadget.com/2019-06-05-subreddit-simulator-gpt-...
Re:APIs for content sites must be free
by renewiltord on Wednesday June 14, 2023 @03:38PM
(#36331420)
My experience is that it is a good source for leads on things to do but not for convincing facts. And an LLM is good for that too. I still end up needing both.
An example of something is someone posting that their AKG headphones will only charge on the USB-C plug if the other end is USB-A. I couldn't get mine to charge, and that was the answer. That answer existed only on Reddit, until recently when someone had that same problem on another forum.