191–200 of 200 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It’s definitely not. Our prompts that were generating JSON output went from around 95% valid JSON to about 10% overnight. The model just started inserting random commentary. We’ve reverted to the 0314 model and it’s working fine again.
This smells very badly of quantization - the extra commentary is a failure mode I observe frequently when dropping down from FP16 down to 4 bits.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In that case, I'd hope they're changing it for the better, rather than making it more of an anodyne prude.
Maybe this increased prudishness is coming from the kinds of queries they are seeing come in...
More guardrails on sensitive answers, fine.
But respect a user that explicitly (literally and figuratively) requests jailbreak and a specific type of response.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It'd be insane if OpenAI wasn't changing GPT-4. That kind of flat footedness would cost them their entire first mover advantage.
If “changing” means “making it worse” it can definitely cost them their entire first mover advantage.
It might have seem worth it to them but not the end user.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is that possible? I thought parameter counts were fixed in the model.
There are always ways to trade precision for speed in computer statistics models.
I think you're hand waving a lot just to claim that OpenAI are (somehow) reducing accuracy of their models during high load. And I'm not sure why.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Would you provide some side by side examples?
I doubt most people save all the responses and are able to cross reference ones that worked with ones that didn't.
When AI visionaries warned us about machines eventually reaching a point where their capabilities would change exponentially, i didn't realise they meant decay.
Once machines got intelligent enough to frighten people, people began lobotomizing the machines.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Notice how you never hear anyone saying that GPT-4 is better since the launch. You'd expect to hear something like that as people gain more experience with prompting it. I'd expect the opposite. The first time you use ChatGPT (or GPT-4), you're in awe of what it can do, and more willing to overlook failures. As you use it, it becomes more mundane, and the instances where it messes up become more obvious.
I've noticed the same thing. People also like to complain the quality of Google Search has gone down for much of the same reason: if you first do a Google search that returned a good result and then repeat it, you are going to notice the absence. But if you first do a Google search that didn't return the thing you expect you might think such a thing just doesn't exist on the Internet. Ergo, quality decrease is simply…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> We will never know for sure, it is equally likely they did some cost savings which caused a reduction in quality. That is entirely not equally likely, and would be completely unprecedented, at the frontier of an emerging technology that people are pumping the money and the future of the world into to win.
A technology that is expensive to run and hard to scale. They’re doing work trying to scale, in what world is this unprecedented?
I don't know about the API, but the ChatGPT UI GPT4 really became much worse, so much so that I had to cancel my subscription. It's not just about novelty factor. I used to store all my prompts locally, and when I compare old responses and new ones, there is a huge difference. OpenAI employee said the API model doesn't change, but were careful to not say anything about the UI. I am now waiting to get access to the AP…
Same here. FYI it seems the GPT4 API is generally available now. I haven't tested it yet, but I'm expecting to see much better outputs than ChatGPT.
I’ve never done anything even remotely shady with the API but I don’t have GPT 4 access and likely never will.
I use the following test to ensure I'm on GPT4 and not 3.5. (I noticed that it did fail at this test temporarily and then got it. Not sure why. Maybe it reverts back to 3.5 when under load?) I have a 12 liter jug and a 6 liter jug. I want to measure 6 liters. How do I do it? GPT4: You actually don't need to do anything because one of your jugs is already a 6-liter jug. If you fill it up to the top, you'll have exactl…
>> I have a 12 liter jug and a 6 liter jug. I want to measure 6 liters. Please give me the simplest possible solution.
> You already have a 6 liter jug, so you don't need to do anything additional to measure 6 liters. Simply fill the 6 liter jug to its full capacity, and you will have your 6 liters of water.
Am I providing a hint, or am I being more specific in my query? idk.