11–20 of 211 posts
The author is right we know almost nothing about the design and training of GPT-4. From the technical report https://cdn.openai.com/papers/gpt-4.pdf : "Given both the competitive landscape and the safety implications of large-scale models like GPT-4, this report contains no further details about the architecture (including model size), hardware, training compute, dataset construction, training method, or similar."
The author is right we know almost nothing about the design and training of GPT-4. From the technical report https://cdn.openai.com/papers/gpt-4.pdf : "Given both the competitive landscape and the safety implications of large-scale models like GPT-4, this report contains no further details about the architecture (including model size), hardware, training compute, dataset construction, training method, or similar."
God bless these saviors for prioritizing our "safety!"
The author is right we know almost nothing about the design and training of GPT-4. From the technical report https://cdn.openai.com/papers/gpt-4.pdf : "Given both the competitive landscape and the safety implications of large-scale models like GPT-4, this report contains no further details about the architecture (including model size), hardware, training compute, dataset construction, training method, or similar."
It’s amazing how one can found a nonprofit with a goal of conducting “open” research and then end up publishing something like this a couple of years later. Greed is good I guess.
Say I'm a conspiracy theorist but I'm calling it, that the pentagon isn't letting OpenAI tell the details of GPT-4 even if they wanted to (which they don't except for some of the researchers probably). National security, export restrictions, munitions classification, new Manhattan project etc. EDIT: I know that most people think it's unlikely and I can't give any direct evidence for it. Does that mean it's not welcom…
It's far more likely that openai have just been building hype by showing off the earlier models, and now they're shutting things down so they can monetize their IP.
Would be interested to see your math and assumptions behind this conclusion.
There’s no way that their plans to monetize this don’t include the defense/natsec industry
Say I'm a conspiracy theorist but I'm calling it, that the pentagon isn't letting OpenAI tell the details of GPT-4 even if they wanted to (which they don't except for some of the researchers probably). National security, export restrictions, munitions classification, new Manhattan project etc. EDIT: I know that most people think it's unlikely and I can't give any direct evidence for it. Does that mean it's not welcom…
Sam Altman (OpenAI CEO): "Oh yes, regular contact."
Up to you to decide to what extent of government that is.
Say I'm a conspiracy theorist but I'm calling it, that the pentagon isn't letting OpenAI tell the details of GPT-4 even if they wanted to (which they don't except for some of the researchers probably). National security, export restrictions, munitions classification, new Manhattan project etc. EDIT: I know that most people think it's unlikely and I can't give any direct evidence for it. Does that mean it's not welcom…
Few days ago I came across this bone chilling AI generated Metal Gear Solid 2 meme with Hideo Kojima characters talking about how the purpose of this technology is to make it impossible to tell what's real or fake, leading directly to regulation of information networks with identity verification so that all information and thought can be traced to their sources, with the government of course becoming the sole arbiter of truth. I wouldn't be surprised at all if this turned into reality.
The author is right we know almost nothing about the design and training of GPT-4. From the technical report https://cdn.openai.com/papers/gpt-4.pdf : "Given both the competitive landscape and the safety implications of large-scale models like GPT-4, this report contains no further details about the architecture (including model size), hardware, training compute, dataset construction, training method, or similar."
It’s amazing how one can found a nonprofit with a goal of conducting “open” research and then end up publishing something like this a couple of years later. Greed is good I guess.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It’s amazing how one can found a nonprofit with a goal of conducting “open” research and then end up publishing something like this a couple of years later. Greed is good I guess.
You're implying that open research is a shady way to become a non profit. They're allowed to change their business model. The open research was published at the time. GPT-2 is fully open source. Even GPT-3 was open source through the beta in 2020. What they didn't release was the fully trained model (the data is more valuable than the code, in this case).
Say I'm a conspiracy theorist but I'm calling it, that the pentagon isn't letting OpenAI tell the details of GPT-4 even if they wanted to (which they don't except for some of the researchers probably). National security, export restrictions, munitions classification, new Manhattan project etc. EDIT: I know that most people think it's unlikely and I can't give any direct evidence for it. Does that mean it's not welcom…
I know that most people think it's unlikely and I can't give any direct evidence for it. Does that mean it's not welcome to say on hacker news?
[flagged]
You can oppose literally every technology by saying "oh it'll use energy - won't someone think of climate change?" The copy+paste of "CO2 emissions" and "energy" has been one of the most successful petroleum company propaganda coups in history.