[dzink]

You got it! After seeing a few tweet storms and articles that turn out to be GPT3 gibberish, I end up coming to HN more for my news because usually someone flags waste of time in the comments.

The software would save people 80% or the work and most are lazy enough to release it as is, instead of fixing the remaining 20%. That laziness will end up forcing legislation to flag and eventually ban or deprioritize all GPT content, which will result in a war of adversarial behaviors trying to hide generated stuff among real. Can’t have nice things!

[andreilys]

How would you go about classifying something as GPT generated?

Let alone flagging/deprioritizing it via some draconian legislation?

[bondarchuk]

By the fact that it was generated using GPT. Same way you would go about classifying something as e.g. not made with slave labour or made with a production process that follows environmental pollution rules. That you can't easily detect it from the end product is not necessarily an obstruction to legislation.

[dzink]

Not saying it should be happening, but if abusive misuse continues, it is likely to happen. Regulations could force labeling on content with punishments if mislabeled (content that makes sense turns to gibberish later on after you've wasted time on it looking for the main point). Flagging could be done by the community (HN style), etc.