201–210 of 817 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They can only do this in the USA. The battle bottleneck is going to be GPUs and countries that have access to it will leap ahead of the US if arbitrary regulations are put in place to neuter LLMs in the US.
You can lobby in every country, what do you mean
I apologize for the confusion. Here's another attempt at creating an ASCII art representation of a person standing on a tall bed:
__
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
_____|__|_____
Bed Personhttps://platform.openai.com/playground?mode=chat&model=gpt-4...
Costs $0.12 per thousand tokens (~words), and I find even fairly heavy use rarely exceeds a dollar a day.
This was my final attempt when I asked for ASCII art of a person standing on a tall bed. I apologize for the confusion. Here's another attempt at creating an ASCII art representation of a person standing on a tall bed: __ | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | _____|__|_____ Bed Person
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You can lobby in every country, what do you mean
I think the healthcare industry case in the US is a great example of how regulatory capture works against the consumer.
You’re just saying random things about US industries as if it’s insightful because you saw a documentary once, well that’s what its reading like
The reason it's worse is basically because it's more 'safe' (not racist, etc). That of course sounds insane, and doesn't mean that safety shouldn't be strived for, etc - but there's an explanation as to how this occurs. It occurs because the system essentially does a latent classification of problems into 'acceptable' or 'not acceptable' to respond to. When this is done, a decent amount of information is lost regardi…
If I run a model like LLaMA locally would it be subject to the same restrictions? In other words is the safety baked into the model or a separate step separate from the main model?
I imagine LLaMA was fed highly-vetted training data, as opposed to being "fixed" afterwards.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I would immediately jump to an AI not being "aligned" by SF techies (or anyone else).
Same here. If I have a choice between honesty and political correctness, I always pick honesty.
To me, it feels like it's started giving superficial responses and encouraging follow-up elsewhere -- I wouldn't be surprized if its prompt has changed to something to that effect. Before, if I had an issue with a library or debugging issue, it would try to be helpful and walk me through potential issues, and ask me to 'let it know' if it worked or not. Now it will try to superficially diagnose the problem and then a…
>To me, it feels like it's started giving superficial responses and encouraging follow-up elsewhere -- I wouldn't be surprized if its prompt has changed to something to that effect. That's the vibe I've been getting. The responses feel a little cagier at times than they used to. I assume it's trying to limit hallucinations in order to increase public trust in the technology, and as a consequence it has been nerfed a…
Is it consistently worse or just sometimes/often worse than before? Any extreme power users or GPT-whisperers here? If it’s only noticeably worse X% of the time my bet would be experimentation. One of my least favorite patterns that tech companies do is use “Experimentation” overzealously or prematurely. Mainly, my problem is they’re not transparent about it, and it creates an inconsistent product experience that jus…
"Indeed, the performance of an AI model like ChatGPT doesn't deteriorate over time. However, human perception of its performance can change due to a variety of psychological factors:
Expectation Bias: As users become more familiar with AI capabilities, their expectations may increase over time. When AI doesn't meet these heightened expectations, users might perceive this as a decline in performance.
Novelty Effect: At the beginning, the novelty of interacting with an AI could lead to positive experiences. However, as the novelty wears off, users may start to focus more on the limitations, creating a perception of decreased performance."
Without this thread I would have said it got stronger with the May 12th update. I don't think that is really true though. There is this random aspect of streaks in asking questions it is good at answering vs streaks of asking questions it is less good at answering.