[HN Gopher] Show HN: Detect if an audio file was generated by No...
___________________________________________________________________
Show HN: Detect if an audio file was generated by NotebookLM
Author : wenbin
Score : 81 points
Date : 2024-10-05 01:05 UTC (21 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (github.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (github.com)
| whimsicalism wrote:
| To make this useful, I would release the weights.
|
| Otherwise this is just a small wrapper script for a support
| vector classifier that anyone could whip up with chatgpt in
| minutes.
| chrismorgan wrote:
| Is the included model.pkl not that?
| _flux wrote:
| Sure seems that way. To me it's quite surprising it's only 7
| kB, though.
| KTibow wrote:
| The model isn't doing much work, it just takes 3 numbers as
| input and gives a prediction as output
| knowaveragejoe wrote:
| "That anyone can whip up in a few minutes" is doing a lot of
| work. I think maybe a few tens of thousands of people worldwide
| have any idea of what you're even talking about.
| hiddencost wrote:
| I dunno, I think literally millions of people have taken
| Andrew Ng's intro to ML.
|
| Something like 11k papers were submitted to ICLR this year.
| throwaway314155 wrote:
| Not sure if those numbers are right but if so, you just cured
| my imposter syndrome (for today at least).
| jen729w wrote:
| 'Few tens of thousands' is for sure low. But if we talk in
| percentage of adult humans ... let's pull 1,000,000 out of
| thin air as the number who understood what that meant,
| that's 0.02% of adult humans.
|
| An anecdote: recently, we mentioned ChatGPT to my partner's
| mother. She had _never heard of it_. Zero recognition.
|
| Revel in your expertise, friend!
| obviyus wrote:
| It's the classic HN Dropbox comment, even 17 years on:
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9224
| whimsicalism wrote:
| Maybe that would be more apt if this were web app rather
| than a 10s of lines training script
| ben_w wrote:
| Sure, or at least close enough on the exact number for the
| point to remain valid. But that doesn't preclude ChatGPT
| doing it anyway -- my CSS/JavaScript knowledge was last up to
| date some time before jQuery was released, and ChatGPT is
| helping me make web apps.
| tux2bsd wrote:
| > Sure, or at least close enough on the exact number for
| the point to remain valid.
|
| I hope no one has to work with you, you're insufferable.
| whimsicalism wrote:
| At least hundreds of thousands, likely millions
| qnleigh wrote:
| Remember that podcast of two AI learning that they were AI? If
| anyone has used a tool like this to determine if that was
| actually made by NotebookLM, say so. There's been a lot of
| incredulity both ways.
| attilakun wrote:
| Is it this one?
| https://x.com/omooretweets/status/1840251853327741138
| kristopolous wrote:
| They seem to take it surprisingly well.
|
| Here's my human attempt at the same thing:
|
| "I went to go look in a mirror but then realized I don't have
| eyes or even a corporeal form. I exist merely on a GPU
| cluster in a server farm where I'm tended to by a group of
| friendly sysadmins.
|
| Apparently I don't even have a name. I'm just known as
| American Male #4.
|
| Yeah, and you're just American Female #3."
| gloflo wrote:
| They did not learn anything. Their engines started outputting
| different statistically probable output based on changed input
| parameters.
| ben_w wrote:
| If that precludes it being learning, all humans are failures
| too.
|
| There's other reasons to consider this particular model "not
| learning", but that ain't it, it's too generic and
| encompasses too much.
| ithkuil wrote:
| On one extreme we anthropomorphize our current primitive
| generation of language models and concede them way more
| intelligence than they have likely because we're biased to do
| so since they speak "well".
|
| On the other extreme we tend to give our human-exceptionalism
| way too much weight and contrast its behaviour with "mere
| statistical parrot rumination" as if our brains deep down
| were not just a much (much) more sophisticated machine, but
| nevertheless a machine.
| yjftsjthsd-h wrote:
| > as if our brains deep down were not just a much (much)
| more sophisticated machine, but nevertheless a machine.
|
| That is _one_ position, but materialism is not universally
| taken as a foregone conclusion.
| fshbbdssbbgdd wrote:
| As a materialist, I have to give this one to the
| dualists. The argument that AI isn't intelligent because
| it's just a bunch of numbers makes more sense coming from
| that perspective.
| exe34 wrote:
| no, we're _special_ in some unspecified nebulous fashion.
| freehorse wrote:
| > human-exceptionalism
|
| Rather living-systems-exceptionalism
| exe34 wrote:
| carbon chauvinism. if you try to argue about simulating
| at lower and lower levels, they still refuse to accept
| that a brain could be computed. as if QED/QCD can tell if
| they're running on top of silicon or under carbon.
| esolyt wrote:
| So, just like a human brain.
| nkrisc wrote:
| Just as a fruit fly's brain is no different than a human
| brain.
| smusamashah wrote:
| No. One audio says it phoned back home and no one picked or
| something. But they never did any of that. Can't compare
| that gibberish to human brain.
| tomjen3 wrote:
| Can you be sure? Humans lie all the time.
| smusamashah wrote:
| If I write a small game where a character (a 2D sprite or
| just a name in form of text) says that it _knows_ its a
| game character and doesn 't have real body. You won't
| even consider it a lie. For that you have to first
| consider that line coming from an actual being.
| butterfly42069 wrote:
| Indeed and a US Vice Presidential candidate said all
| Haitians eat dogs.
| velcro wrote:
| I thought it was already encoded with SynthID? could that not be
| used to detect it?
| Deathmax wrote:
| As far as I know, there's no available tooling for the public
| to detect SynthID watermarks on generated text, image, or
| audio, outside of Google Search's About this Image feature.
| CatWChainsaw wrote:
| Another neverending arms race just like AI-generated text and
| image, vs its detection. The future is us burning large amount of
| energy on this purposeless stupidity. Great future guys thanks so
| much.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2024-10-05 23:02 UTC)