71–80 of 99 posts
And now we truly know why GPT insists to say "as an AI model" when we break a rule. It's precisely this. Like a signature, so we find it out in the wild when it's abused.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Haha, that is hilarious. I wonder why they did not just use deepl or similar that is made for exactly this. Anyhow, I will let them know.
Cargo culting probably. Everybody is talking about ChatGPT so "obviously" it's the right tool for any job imaginable. Don't need to review the output because it's "omnipotent".
Prose used to function as proof-of-work for humans everywhere - marketing, academia, and so on. Credibility was assigned based on the quality (and quantity) of the language instead of the content. I see mostly positive effects of this ending.
But GPT-generated prose still reads a bit "flat" to me. There's no "sizzle". There's no surprising words. In terms of Shannon information theory, there's not enough information there - not enough entropy.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It’s probably provided as system instructions for rejecting things. You can use the API and feed it with different instructions with the system role
I kind of wonder if maybe they look for certain words in the output (or run it through some sort of sentiment analysis) and if it fails they submit the prompt again with a very strongly worded system prompt (after your prompt) instructing it to reject the command and begin with the phrase “As an AI language model”. Like, I haven’t heard about a way they could actually implement filters this powerful “inside” the mode…
They’ve probably done it strongly enough that it can’t really not do it, maybe on purpose to prevent misuse
For now, this is just funny, I laughed. But with the advent of all these new open-source LLMs, it will get worse. If you thought people were gullible for falling for fake comments from bots, just wait for the near future. Post-factual/Post-Truth era truly begins. The internet that used to be a source of information is no more, only islands of truth will remain (like, hopefully, Wikipedia, but even that is questionabl…
i feel i can start to read when someone uses gippie, because i use it alot. I imagine a future where i use gippie to write an email and the receiver uses gippie to summarize and respond. There's also a future evolution of 'typo', where gippie hellucinates some non sensical answer. "Oh my bad, my bots trippin' LOL'
Having watched the discussion here for the past couple of days, I agree with frozenwind's comment. I wrote my own reflection here (the last comment): https://aisnakeoil.substack.com/p/a-misleading-open-letter-a... Regarding impacts upon academia, I wrote two comments here: https://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2023/04/12/guest-post-gp... I'd also like to emphasize that it is not only about open source LLMs. I haven't f…
> who knows what kind of content the criminals there possess? As a person who regularly browses darknet forums, let me tell you, the text contents there are almost identical to any web forum you find on the internet.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The thing is, the internet is already a cesspool of meaningless, misleading and outright malicious information. I guess the earlier we all collectively realize it the best it is.
The internet is currently quite useful, it could stand to be a lot less so. Don’t let your cynicism blind you to the fact that we do have a lot to lose.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The risk is more in the LLMs themselves, as whoever gets to control them gets to decide how people are going to experience the world. For the time being I might still double check all the answers I get from ChatGPT, but overtime the LLMs will get better and I'll get more lazy, thus making the LLMs the primary lens through which one views the world. You've underlined the major risk these LLMs are for humanity. For a…
I see LLM's as the new UX layer, mobile was it for a while after mouses/keyboards. Since LLM's work mostly with text, I see how a downgrade in the interaction medium can become a downgrade in the information outputs. The thing is, lets hope the current web doesn't totally disappears/obliterates. HN will still be HN LLM's or not, shitty comments are shitty however they get produced.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Cargo culting probably. Everybody is talking about ChatGPT so "obviously" it's the right tool for any job imaginable. Don't need to review the output because it's "omnipotent".
This problem is going to get worse as GPT gets better. It's the new "but the computer said...", with nobody being willing to realize that it said something insane. I seriously worry about GPT++ setting government policy in 10 years (or, worse, deciding how it's going to be applied case by case).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Cargo culting probably. Everybody is talking about ChatGPT so "obviously" it's the right tool for any job imaginable. Don't need to review the output because it's "omnipotent".
This problem is going to get worse as GPT gets better. It's the new "but the computer said...", with nobody being willing to realize that it said something insane. I seriously worry about GPT++ setting government policy in 10 years (or, worse, deciding how it's going to be applied case by case).
Good news! Machine learning models are already doing that, all over the world, with all the problems you would expect (a lot of the AI alignment discussion these days is an attempt by people making money in AI to distract from current AI issues.)