HackerTrans
TopNewTrendsCommentsPastAskShowJobs

yamihere

no profile record

comments

yamihere
·tahun lalu·discuss
Just joining in with the “Wow, this is amazing” crowd. I usually detest websites that dink with scrolling to animate content in and out of view, except for well designed long form narrative content; but this is slick.

A challenge to all the “10x-ed my productivity” LLManiacs: how long to recreate this landing page using nothing but prompts (and how much $$ for a how-to course :)

A challenge to the “the’re gonna take our jobs” LLMongers: git gud, its possible. this is living proof.

(yes, i did just want to post those portmanteaus, even though it was all ChatGPT: https://pastebin.com/zrsj6DcB )
yamihere
·tahun lalu·discuss
Thanks again. Mine was an uncharitable interpretation, apologies for that. I appreciate your engagement with critical comments without coming off as defensive or snarky.

This looks like a lot of work and good will were poured into it, and I can see how it can be useful to a fitness focused audience.

You control the messaging on the site and in your apps, and you make it clear that this is not authoritative data. Everything built on top of this needs to have the same messaging, but it has probably been ingested into multiple LLMs already.

I think some sort of licensing requirement that the LLM source of this data be prominently disclosed will not keep this from becoming a source of truth for other datasets, products, and services; but, it is still worth the effort. All you can do is all you can do, right?
yamihere
·tahun lalu·discuss
That’s the best part! People don’t care and won’t check! They’ll just pay money!

Most of the data being close enough to be better than nothing and not actively harmful + a disclaimer and the author is absolved of all responsibility!

Even better, this will now be used in all sorts of other apps, analyses, and for training other LLMs! And I expect all those will also prominently include an “all of this was genereated by an LLM” disclamers. For sure.
yamihere
·tahun lalu·discuss
Nice! Thanks for responding.

>> Outputs undergo rigorous validation steps, including cross-checking with advanced auditing models such as OpenAI’s o1-pro, which has proven especially proficient at performing high-quality random audits.

>> there was a lot of manual effort involved in coming to that conclusion with my own effort to review the LLM's reasoning

So, the randomly audited entries seemed reasonable to you – not even the data itself, just the reasoning about the generated data. Did the manual reviews stop once things started looking good enough? Are the audits ongoing, to fill out the rest of the dataset? Would those be manually double-checked as well?

>> I became interested in exploring how recent advances in generative AI could enable entirely new kinds of consumer products—ones whose core innovations leveraged AI but didn’t explicitly market themselves as “AI products.”

Once again: Why not market this as an AI product? This is LLMs all the way down.

People are already interested in using this dataset. I was. Now, LLM generated “usually close enough to not be actively harmful” data is being distributed as a source for any and all to use. I think your disclaimer is excellent. Does your license require an equivalent disclaimer be provided by those using this data?
yamihere
·tahun lalu·discuss
>> User-generated databases can be unreliable

>> Foods discovered via these searches are fed back into the database,

Aren’t LLMs also unreliable? How do you ensure the new content is from an authoritative, accurate source? How do you ensure the numbers that make it into the database are actually what the source provided?

According to the Methodology/About page

>> The LLM is tasked with creating complete nutritional values, explicitly explaining the rationale behind each value it generates. Outputs undergo rigorous validation steps,

Those rigorous validation steps were also created with LLMs, correct?

>> whose core innovations leveraged AI but didn’t explicitly market themselves as “AI products.”

Odd choice for an entirely AI based service. First thought I had after reading that was: must be because people don’t trust AI generated information. Seems disengenuous to minimize the AI aspect in marketing while this product only exists because of AI.

Great idea though, thanks for giving it a shot!