Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

GPT-4 details leaked?

threadreaderapp.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 648 posts

Re: GPT-4 details leaked?

#141

Post by PostOnce »

ben_w wrote: post #118
PostOnce wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So fold. Running out of money to run a charity means they now suddenly need to fuck over the people the charity was supposed to help (that is, everyone on earth ) ? Imagine if a feed the homeless charity accepted private investment and went around installing anti-homeless spikes everywhere after stopping feeding anyone. It's a similar style of behavior.

It's not even remotely the same as anti-homeless spikes. We've just had the massive fine against 3M for knowing and hiding the risks of PFAS, and the top comments here were "increase the fines! Lock up the bosses!" Now we have a company going "we had to put a lot of effort into preventing this model from cheerfully outputting Al Quaida propaganda, explicit rape threats, and detailed instructions for an amateur to mak…

> "outputs al qaeda propaganda"

So does Microsoft Word. Both require a human to tell the software what to output.

> as if none of the other FAANGs could trivially cross any regulatory barriers that emerge.

That's the point.

This miracle technology does not belong to a few rich men, it belongs to us all.

Tech oligarchs are provably not more responsible than the rest of us, and do not deserve to lock us out of the garden whose fruit they seek to pick.

A rich man can meet the regulations that allow him to build a robot to take your job, but YOU are not allowed to build the same robot to help boost your own income? Because that might be irresponsible?

Re: GPT-4 details leaked?

#142

Post by ed_mercer »

Vecr wrote: post #123
Llamamoe wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How low can you get the memory and computational power requirements that way?

You can run that model (Wizard-30) on a computer with 64 gigabytes of RAM (or smaller, I don't know how tight you can cut it). You obviously want fast RAM and a good CPU, but you don't need a GPU.

AFAIK you can get away with a swapfile, no need for large amounts of RAM.

Re: GPT-4 details leaked?

#143

Post by ompto »

swyx wrote: post #93
refulgentis wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Like I said, it gains a little bit in every retelling. Why are you aggressively defending unsourced tripe?

well as someone out of the loop - is there a source on the Q4 2022 version then?

Not sure about the Q4 2022 version but there was a post [1] a month ago that also claimed something like 16 MOE that got a lot of attention, and some similar-ish rumors before too with less detail.

So could be either more detail leaking over time or just a random made up post that took root a long time ago continually being retold with slightly more guesstimated detail added own each time to make the poster sound like they're in the know.

Impossible to tell until the actual details are confirmed I guess.

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36413296

Re: GPT-4 details leaked?

#144

Post by ed_mercer »

vouaobrasil wrote: post #95
M3L0NM4N wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is such a pessimistic view to take that I cannot even begin to describe how you are wrong.

I would love to see your rebuttals, especially since I have never seen any strong arguments in favour of AI being a net benefit to society, and I have thought and read about this at lenght. Of course, I always expect downvotes on my posts here since there is a strong tendency towards loving technology here. But what I find most interesting is that there is absolutely no taking of responsibility of any technological c…

>is it reasonable to say that all these latest AI developments have no serious risks?

There are definitely problems today with people abusing ChatGPT for malicious purposes, but given the retardedness of current LLMs I don't think we need to worry about a AI mastermind taking over anytime soon.

Re: GPT-4 details leaked?

#147

Post by rebolek »

bayindirh wrote: post #109
maximamas wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s ironic you say: “we are playing with fire.” Playing with fire is, in large part, literally how humans have come to dominate this planet. Why stop now?

Maybe because we're on the verge of being able to create fires which can actually consume the only home we have? Playing with fire is in large part an ego and greed issue. Yes, it allows us to dominate, but at what cost? I'd rather live a more balanced life than a greedy and ego driven life. I may not own the world, but I can be happy and sleep sound at night, and that matters.

We had nuclear weapons for almost 80 years and the world still hasn't ended. And I think that nuclear weapons are way more dangerous than Markov chains on steroids.

Re: GPT-4 details leaked?

#148

Post by wiz21c »

kyledrake wrote: post #65
PostOnce wrote: post #19

"Open" AI, a charity to benefit us all by pushing and publishing the frontier of scientific knowledge. Nevermind, fuckers, actually it's just to take your jobs and make a few VCs richer. We'll keep the science a secret and try to pressure the government into making it illegal for you to compete with us. https://github.com/ggerganov/llama.cpp https://github.com/openlm-research/open_llama https://huggingface.co/TheBlok…

Unfortunately I've found the current OSS models to be vastly inferior to the OpenAI models. Would love to see someone actually get close to what they can do with GPT-3.5/4, except capable of running on commodity GPUs. What's the most impressive open model so far?

What are all the researchers in universities doing ? Couldn't they improve these models (they do have big brains after all) with tax payer's money and put the results under some cool open source license...

Re: GPT-4 details leaked?

#149

Post by bergen »

TeMPOraL wrote: post #125
BelleOfTheBall wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is a very dangerous way to approach copyright laws. They are definitely abused by corporations like Disney, infamously so, but abolishing them is absolutely not the answer. Art makers are already struggling en masse, taking away their ability to earn money off their work isn't an answer, especially if it's just to train a predictive text generator.

Counterpoint: there's way too much "art makers", copyright is keeping the quality ceiling down, good content loses monetization game with spam - all while that "predictive text generator" is, for better or worse, pretty much the most magnificent piece of technology invented this century, and - for better or worse - it's likely to become next major shift to economy and life.

How do you believe copyright is keeping the quality down in particular? As I see it, the reason is marketability and trying to conform to standards. Making a new Marvel Movie is sure to have a payoff. Making Parasite MIGHT have a higher payoff, but the risk is way higher.

Removing copyright might help to get various more spin-offs and reiterations on previous work, which does increase the scope, but taking the ability for makers to profit from their work in a traditional sense, will bring us closer (back) to a time when commissioned artwork was the main art you saw

Post reply on HN