171–180 of 205 posts
I lack imagination. What is GPT-3 (and generative text models in general) useful for, other than toys? It can write essays, can we expect it to replace writers for newspapers and magazines? Can it write coherent technical documentation? Replace speechwriters? Edit: looks like the comment thread below is similar https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32554955
This makes me sad. I hoped to see less use of language models in the wild; looks like we're heading the other direction. I was recently able to articulate to myself why I dislike language models like GPT-3 so much. Language is fundamentally about communication . I have a mental state, and language lets me share that some of that mental state with another human being. It's quite remarkable, and the cornerstone for pre…
---
There are a few problems with LukeV's argument. First, he conflates the ability to generate human-like text with the ability to communicate. Just because GPT-3 can generate text that sounds like it was written by a human does not mean that it cannot communicate. In fact, GPT-3 is quite good at carrying a line of thought or argument through a longer text, as evidenced by the fact that it is often used by writers to generate ideas and outlines for their articles.
Second, LukeV claims that GPT-3 is at its weakest when writing about the relationships between a set of concepts. However, this is not necessarily true. GPT-3 may not be able to generate text that is perfectly grammatical or that makes perfect sense, but it is often able to generate text that is nonetheless meaningful and insightful. For example, GPT-3 has been used to generate essays on complex topics such as the philosophy of mind, and these essays have been well-received by readers.
Third, LukeV argues that the world does not need more words, but this is clearly not the case. The world needs more communication, and GPT-3 can help to facilitate this by generating text that is meaningful and insightful. In fact, GPT-3 is already being used by writers to generate ideas and outlines for their articles, and it is likely that this use will only increase in the future.
In conclusion, LukeV's argument against GPT-3 is flawed. GPT-3 is a valuable tool that can help to facilitate communication, and the world needs more communication, not less.
----
I'm not sure who I agree with, but that's GPT-1's response to you regarding your critique of itself. Have at it!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
At least it didn’t go into an infinite loop. Maybe there’s explicit logic to prevent that.
What are thresholds used in generative text to stop generating characters?
I'm really surprised they don't charge a very high price with a generous free tier, and then have an army of salespeople who will offer you whatever discount is necessary to make your business model work. If you want to use GPT-3 to build an AI-lawyer, it'll be very expensive... but to build a tool for customer support for walmart will be cheap, etc.
> We have been looking forward to reducing pricing for a long time. Our teams have made incredible progress in making our models more efficient to run, which has reduced the cost it takes to serve them, and we are now passing these savings along to our customers. Nothing to do with Stable Diffusion then, no?
If the open source community then other company's didn't follow along with them then we would still be being price gauged in a monopoly situation, hopefully same thing happens to dalle soon
This makes me sad. I hoped to see less use of language models in the wild; looks like we're heading the other direction. I was recently able to articulate to myself why I dislike language models like GPT-3 so much. Language is fundamentally about communication . I have a mental state, and language lets me share that some of that mental state with another human being. It's quite remarkable, and the cornerstone for pre…
I thought this was interesting so I literally pasted the entire thing into OpenAI's playground and asked DaVinci to write a rebuttal of your argument. Here is what it said: --- There are a few problems with LukeV's argument. First, he conflates the ability to generate human-like text with the ability to communicate. Just because GPT-3 can generate text that sounds like it was written by a human does not mean that it…
This makes me sad. I hoped to see less use of language models in the wild; looks like we're heading the other direction. I was recently able to articulate to myself why I dislike language models like GPT-3 so much. Language is fundamentally about communication . I have a mental state, and language lets me share that some of that mental state with another human being. It's quite remarkable, and the cornerstone for pre…
I thought this was interesting so I literally pasted the entire thing into OpenAI's playground and asked DaVinci to write a rebuttal of your argument. Here is what it said: --- There are a few problems with LukeV's argument. First, he conflates the ability to generate human-like text with the ability to communicate. Just because GPT-3 can generate text that sounds like it was written by a human does not mean that it…
I lack imagination. What is GPT-3 (and generative text models in general) useful for, other than toys? It can write essays, can we expect it to replace writers for newspapers and magazines? Can it write coherent technical documentation? Replace speechwriters? Edit: looks like the comment thread below is similar https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32554955
GPT-3 is useful for a lot of things. It can write essays, it can write technical documentation, it can write speeches, it can write fiction, it can write poetry, it can write jokes, it can write jokes about jokes, it can write jokes about jokes about jokes, it can write jokes about jokes about jokes about jokes, it can write jokes about jokes about jokes about jokes about jokes, it can write jokes about jokes about j…
This makes me sad. I hoped to see less use of language models in the wild; looks like we're heading the other direction. I was recently able to articulate to myself why I dislike language models like GPT-3 so much. Language is fundamentally about communication . I have a mental state, and language lets me share that some of that mental state with another human being. It's quite remarkable, and the cornerstone for pre…
GPT-3 does nothing without a human inputting what it wants it to output. GPT-3 is as much a tool for communication as are sounds, words, symbols, etc.
Whether it was carved in stone by a human hand or generated on the cloud by an AI, the intent to communicate is always coming from a human.
If you think the text generated by GPT-3 does not carry the right meaning or has "no underlying _thing_ that is being communicated", it just means that the human behind is not using the tool properly. Just like sometimes you use a word that doesn't mean what you think it means.