How are people getting gpt-3 api keys? Might I have one?
OpenAI should now change their name to ClosedAI
51–60 of 117 posts
Re: OpenAI should now change their name to ClosedAI
#52There's always OpenCog: https://github.com/opencog
Now is an especially good time to join the OpenCog project. Ben and the folks behind it are just now starting a big push to re-architect big chunks of it, including the AtomSpace. And OpenCogCon was just held as a two day virtual conference, and the entire thing is available on Youtube.
I'd encourage anyone who's interested to join the Opencog Slack and/or Google group and check out what's going on.
Re: OpenAI should now change their name to ClosedAI
#53Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't see how this is a nuanced perspective - it seems to restate the same complaints/arguments just about every comment makes in these discussions. A nuanced perspective would look at the arguments as to why OpenAI is doing the things they are doing. For example: * OpenAI publishes in closed journals (actually conference proceedings) because that is where all the cutting edge research is published and reviewed. I…
> At some point a company needs to make money :-/ OpenAI started as a non-profit.
Non-profit doesn't mean zero revenue.
Re: OpenAI should now change their name to ClosedAI
#54Can anyone point to a more nuanced perspective on this? Ideally not only with regards to OpenAI; it is still quite common that research published in some of the "top" venues does not disclose the underlying source code. Anecdote: I once pushed researchers to publish their code when I was peer-reviewing and it turned out that the code was super slow in comparison to the benchmark algorithms they compared with (compari…
I don't necessarily agree with the following with regards to OpenAI, but it is what I have been told by a few professors and other academics in bioinformatics: Money is terribly tight in academia, and even at hot think tanks like OpenAI. The difference between a working but not very pretty prototype and a polished product you are willing to be associated with may seem like just a bunch of trivial boilerplate such as…
Such an odd attitude. There’s no way it takes 5-10x engineering effort to write some tests for components of a one-shot python script, as most scientific code is. It’s maybe the easiest type of software to test. Would this type of attitude fly for anything else? Can you imagine if chemists worked like this?
“Yea most chemists don’t like to release their procedures, since taking the trouble of accurately measuring out reagents could be 5-10x the effort and grant money is tight. Plus sometimes they don’t want to go all the way to the cabinet to grab a beaker so they just do the reaction in a coffee mug. The truth is that sometimes the procedure is just too ugly to release. And if they come out of the lab with a new chemical, what does it matter?”
Re: OpenAI should now change their name to ClosedAI
#55Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't see how this is a nuanced perspective - it seems to restate the same complaints/arguments just about every comment makes in these discussions. A nuanced perspective would look at the arguments as to why OpenAI is doing the things they are doing. For example: * OpenAI publishes in closed journals (actually conference proceedings) because that is where all the cutting edge research is published and reviewed. I…
> At some point a company needs to make money :-/ OpenAI started as a non-profit.
The Girl Scouts are a non-profit yet they don't give their cookies away for free.
Re: OpenAI should now change their name to ClosedAI
#56Earlier quoted context omitted.
> "This AI stuff is dangerous to world" It's not exactly that, their rhetoric is: "This AI stuff is dangerous to world if YOU use it. But when we use it, it is good." All entities think that they hold the key to good values, while the others are always suspected of hiding vile intentions.
That's a stronger opinion about their views than necessarily is true. Based on their actions, OpenAI seems to (rightly, in my opinion) view that some people would misuse GPT-3/etc, even if the majority would not.
Define misuse.
Re: OpenAI should now change their name to ClosedAI
#57Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's a stronger opinion about their views than necessarily is true. Based on their actions, OpenAI seems to (rightly, in my opinion) view that some people would misuse GPT-3/etc, even if the majority would not.
Define misuse.
One obvious example would be to fully automate social engineering email scams. Imagine how much disruption it would cause if spearphishing became as common as robocalls have become post-automation.
Re: OpenAI should now change their name to ClosedAI
#58Someone asked for a more nuanced perspective, so here we go. For a lot of AI researchers, OpenAI has been a huge disappointment. We had hope that OpenAI would be the company to democratize AI with good open source work, transparency, no PR bullshit (aka DeepMind), and evangelism. That they would develop in the open, and perhaps even do research in the open. You know, kind of like the name says. It all started out oka…
Hugging face and the Spacy team have done some incredible work. Huge fan of both for my NLP projects.
I think this illustrates just how complex the topic is, though. Hugging Face is awesome, and Transformers has done so much to democratize NLP, but does it exists without labs like OpenAI releasing models like GPT-2? The ecosystem is still young and fluid, and as a result, it's super complex. I completely understand the critique of what OpenAI is now vs. what they positioned themselves as early on, but I think it is also a symptom of all the open questions around how ML research is to be done in a way that maximizes community benefit while remaining sustainable.
Re: OpenAI should now change their name to ClosedAI
#59Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes. If you few-shot prime it with prompts of the form " tag: " and then just feed it " tag:" it'll generate automatically, just from completion. It does this shockingly well, the paper has specific examples. It can also do fun tricks like condensing a complicated Wikipedia article down to a second grade level, including built in metaphors. An example of this is on the API beta website IIRC.
That doesn't demonstrate comprehension in any interesting sense. You don't necessarily have to comprehend a text in order to generate a plausible nonsense continuation of it.
Sure you do. If I hand you a few sentences in a language you can't comprehend at all, you won't be able to create a plausible continuation.
Re: OpenAI should now change their name to ClosedAI
#60Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't see how this is a nuanced perspective - it seems to restate the same complaints/arguments just about every comment makes in these discussions. A nuanced perspective would look at the arguments as to why OpenAI is doing the things they are doing. For example: * OpenAI publishes in closed journals (actually conference proceedings) because that is where all the cutting edge research is published and reviewed. I…
> At some point a company needs to make money :-/ OpenAI started as a non-profit.
"OpenAI is governed by the board of OpenAI Nonprofit, which consists of OpenAI LP employees Greg Brockman (Chairman & CTO), Ilya Sutskever (Chief Scientist), and Sam Altman (CEO), and non-employees Adam D’Angelo, Holden Karnofsky, Reid Hoffman, Shivon Zilis, and Tasha McCauley."