Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Meet “Claude”: Anthropic’s rival to ChatGPT

scale.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 165 posts

Re: Meet “Claude”: Anthropic’s rival to ChatGPT

#31

Post by trekkie1024 »

KRAKRISMOTT wrote: post #29
ma2rten wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, you need billions of words to train a large language model.

Assuming all human languages have a common shared semantic meaning in latent space (I am flipping cause and effect here, but our purposes it doesn't really matter), and assuming that human languages largely follow the same pattern (this assumption is based on the fact that we can trace the roots of modern languages back to the Phoenician script), it is reasonable to assume that we can fine-tune a self supervised mode…

So you're saying something like the Universal Translator from Star Trek might be possible?

Re: Meet “Claude”: Anthropic’s rival to ChatGPT

#33

Post by zone411 »

code51 wrote: post #15
LeoPanthera wrote: post #11

They say Claude is "more verbose", and claim this is a positive. I disagree. My biggest criticism of ChatGPT is that its answers are extraordinarily long and waffly. It sometimes reminds me of a scam artist trying to bamboozle me with words. I would much prefer short, concise, precise answers.

You are able to prompt ChatGPT to be concise, you know? They set a default and showed it to the world. It is up to you to tune it according to your preference.

That's right. I see so many people get stuck thinking that the default setting without a proper prompt or context is all these models can do.

Re: Meet “Claude”: Anthropic’s rival to ChatGPT

#34

Post by tux3 »

ehnto wrote: post #7
united893 wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The response takes a long time to generate. The user could just sit there and stare at a blank response, or start reading in realtime as the response is generated.

I find it surprising that you can display any of it before the whole thing is done, since I would expect information dependencies between the start and the finish of a sentence or paragraphs. I have yet to really look into how these models work, they are black boxes to me.

Check out the illustrated transformer: https://jalammar.github.io/illustrated-transformer/

tl;dr: It decodes the output one word at a time, but at each step it can focus on any mix of words from the input via the attention mechanism. So the output token n can't depend on future output token n+1 in GPT, but it can attend to any of the input tokens

Re: Meet “Claude”: Anthropic’s rival to ChatGPT

#36

Post by [deleted] »

LeoPanthera wrote: post #11

They say Claude is "more verbose", and claim this is a positive. I disagree. My biggest criticism of ChatGPT is that its answers are extraordinarily long and waffly. It sometimes reminds me of a scam artist trying to bamboozle me with words. I would much prefer short, concise, precise answers.

[deleted]

Re: Meet “Claude”: Anthropic’s rival to ChatGPT

#37

Post by KRAKRISMOTT »

trekkie1024 wrote: post #31
KRAKRISMOTT wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Assuming all human languages have a common shared semantic meaning in latent space (I am flipping cause and effect here, but our purposes it doesn't really matter), and assuming that human languages largely follow the same pattern (this assumption is based on the fact that we can trace the roots of modern languages back to the Phoenician script), it is reasonable to assume that we can fine-tune a self supervised mode…

So you're saying something like the Universal Translator from Star Trek might be possible?

For humans yes, I am not saying one-shot learning would be possible for undocumented indigenous languages but few shot language acquisition in cases of a single surviving speaker is something that I would consider highly probable. This hypothesis relies heavily on the nature of variational learning in latent space and observations about human languages. It is of course possible that some ethnicity would have a language that's so different from other languages that it is effectively alien (and the assumption homo sapiens common brain structure and physiology have no influence on our languages and/or the human neural structure cannot be statistically modeled by latent variables, at least not with the current variational learning techniques). This is possible but very, very unlikely.

Re: Meet “Claude”: Anthropic’s rival to ChatGPT

#38

Post by prox »

LeoPanthera wrote: post #27
prox wrote: post #22

I like to compare these models to the Star Trek main computer core. The computer on a starship is explicitly not self aware, but has to interface with humans through mostly voice comms. It has to give accurate information for ship operations, something the chatbots so far still get wrong on occasion (or slip up details) The ships computer also doesn’t seem to do entertainment like “tell a bedtime story” , since holog…

This varied over the course of the show. In the first season, some writers assumed the computer was self-aware, and it even addressed a crew member as "Sir" at one point, interrupting them when it had enough information. In later seasons it acts more like, well, a computer. Geordi does play (verbal) games with it in one episode, however, while bored on a shuttlecraft trip.

I have to look that Geordi episode up.

But I am mostly familiar with the later TNG era star trek, so I didn’t know it was written as self-aware in the early days.

Some episodes do feature “bugs” where holographic actors become aware being in a program/being an actor. The episode where an Irish town program has run too long on Voyager comes to mind.

(Edit: I do wonder if the holographic actors are somehow sandboxed containers in the main computer core, or run on a different system)

Re: Meet “Claude”: Anthropic’s rival to ChatGPT

#40

Post by Al-Khwarizmi »

nathias wrote: post #14

we need less censorious AIs not more ... the claim that it's somehow 'ethical' to have a guy baking in his opinions about things in a tool used globally is absurd to anyone who ever read anything about ethics

My hope is on a non-American alternative.

The American society seems too engulfed by puritanism to produce a less straightjacketed chatbot.

Post reply on HN