The genie escapes: Stanford copies the ChatGPT AI for less than $600 • Hacker News Board

Re: The genie escapes: Stanford copies the ChatGPT AI for less than $600

#131

Post by neilellis » Mon, Mar 20, 2023, 11:42 PM UTC

Wow, Stanford's Alpaca AI project is a real game-changer. The fact that it performs on par with ChatGPT but costs less than $600 to build is both exciting and terrifying. Sure, it's great to see AI becoming more accessible, but it's also a massive wakeup call for the potential misuse of these technologies.

We've got big names like OpenAI, Google, Apple, Meta, Baidu, and Amazon putting in serious time and money to ensure their language models are safe and ethical. However, now that we know it's possible to build powerful AI models on a budget, it's crucial to think about what this means for the future of AI regulation and safety.

This Alpaca AI project is a stark reminder that we need to have a serious conversation about the possible repercussions of AI proliferation. We can't just sit back and assume the big companies will take care of everything. The genie is out of the bottle, and it's time for everyone in the tech community to face the music and take responsibility for the AI revolution.

Re: The genie escapes: Stanford copies the ChatGPT AI for less than $600

#132

Post by thomasahle » Mon, Mar 20, 2023, 11:45 PM UTC

superkuh wrote: post #37

thomasahle wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

3 bits? Is that for all weights in the network?

As far as I know, yes. https://arxiv.org/abs/2210.17323 "Specifically, GPTQ can quantize GPT models with 175 billion parameters in approximately four GPU hours, reducing the bitwidth down to 3 or 4 bits per weight, with negligible accuracy degradation relative to the uncompressed baseline." This would be 175 billion 3 bit weights instead of 175 billion 16 (or 32!) bit weights. It massively reduces the size of the mod…

But they have to expand it back out to actually use it, right? Or does NVIDIA support 3 bit matrix mult?

Re: The genie escapes: Stanford copies the ChatGPT AI for less than $600

#133

Post by doctor_eval » Mon, Mar 20, 2023, 11:59 PM UTC

cjohnson318 wrote: post #90

> It seems these godlike AIs are already frighteningly cheap and easy to replicate. "godlike"? Really? I'm not religious, but this seems like an overreaction for something that has no agency.

How do you know agency is not simply the output of a large language model encoded in neurons? What is the difference between neuronal and digital weights?

Considering that we don’t know how the brain works so well, and we don’t understand why LLMs work so well, simply on the basis of their output I think the safest assumption is that these models do indeed have agency, or at least the capability of agency.

Re: The genie escapes: Stanford copies the ChatGPT AI for less than $600

#134

Post by doctor_eval » Tue, Mar 21, 2023, 12:00 AM UTC

jakedata wrote: post #63

AI bootstrapping AI is a sci-fi trope that goes back decades. I first encountered it in The Cybernetic Samurai while in high school. While the details differ, the reality is that AI is a catalyst for more of itself. I don't remember many books where this ends particularly well. Perhaps the Culture universe could be a survivable outcome. Hopefully we don't get Berzerkers first.

It’s the beginning of the AI singularity. It’s not that it’s bad, we just can’t see anything beyond the event horizon.

Re: The genie escapes: Stanford copies the ChatGPT AI for less than $600

#135

Post by amrb » Tue, Mar 21, 2023, 12:14 AM UTC

Anything open will need training and attention to be an openai competitor, tho I'm happy to see the function of this one: https://huggingface.co/spaces/togethercomputer/OpenChatKit

Re: The genie escapes: Stanford copies the ChatGPT AI for less than $600

#136

Post by roflyear » Tue, Mar 21, 2023, 12:59 AM UTC

stavros wrote: post #56

johntb86 wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would the LLM model know what version it actually is? It was trained on data from before that model version even existed.

- What version model are you? - I am based on the GPT-4 architecture, which is an iteration of OpenAI's Generative Pre-trained Transformer models. My training data includes information up to September 2021. - How do you know your version? - As an AI language model, I am programmed with information about my own architecture and the version I am based on. My creators at OpenAI provided me with this knowledge, which hel…

Likely making this up.

Re: The genie escapes: Stanford copies the ChatGPT AI for less than $600

#137

Post by stavros » Tue, Mar 21, 2023, 1:05 AM UTC

roflyear wrote: post #136

stavros wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

- What version model are you? - I am based on the GPT-4 architecture, which is an iteration of OpenAI's Generative Pre-trained Transformer models. My training data includes information up to September 2021. - How do you know your version? - As an AI language model, I am programmed with information about my own architecture and the version I am based on. My creators at OpenAI provided me with this knowledge, which hel…

Likely making this up.

Why did it not make up GPT-5 or something else, though?

Re: The genie escapes: Stanford copies the ChatGPT AI for less than $600

#138

Post by est31 » Tue, Mar 21, 2023, 1:18 AM UTC

Waterluvian wrote: post #83

If you use consciousness as a baseline, the intellectual difference between a grade schooler and a PhD is tiny. This is what I think comparing these bots is like. You can argue that they’re very close. But the delta makes a very big difference for any practical purposes because we’re looking for nuanced capability.

There is a blog post that drives this point home with very good illustrations:

https://waitbutwhy.com/2015/01/artificial-intelligence-revol...

Basically, at the point where we have "almost human" level AI, it won't take much to get AI that's beyond human capabilities.

Re: The genie escapes: Stanford copies the ChatGPT AI for less than $600

#139

Post by user_named » Tue, Mar 21, 2023, 1:25 AM UTC

genericacct wrote: post #105

superkuh wrote: post #8

Hardly. I've played a lot with the 7,13, and 30B llamas as well as the 7 and 13B alpacas fine tuned by Stanford. They do not have emergent abilities like being able to generate rhymes or, say, represent a movie plot as emoji. Even openai's old text-davinci-003 (gpt3.5, but text completion, not the chat ones) far outperforms them. That said, I have hopes for a 65B 3-bit quantized alpaca-fine tuned. We'll see when some…

fwiw 7B is totaly useless for the subset of non english languages i've used, 13B a bit less so, but nowhere near as good as gpt. GPT's performance in non-trivial translation tasks is unbelievable. all those articles mentioning jobs that are going to be replaced fail to mention translators are probably going to be the first.

You need the translators to QA the output from GPT. It's less work but not much less, and more types of translation work becomes feasible when leveraging GPT. I'm guessing the job market for translators will grow, not decline.

Re: The genie escapes: Stanford copies the ChatGPT AI for less than $600

#140

Post by B1FF_PSUVM » Tue, Mar 21, 2023, 1:34 AM UTC

tantalor wrote: post #102

EGreg wrote: post #75

I warned about this for years. Finally an article gets it right. Everyone will soon have the equivalent of online nuclear weapons: bot swarms that infiltrate every forum, including this one.

Spam has existed on the internet for a long time.

My pet theory was that AI would come out of spam bots.

Close enough.