Live data from Hacker News

GPT-4 details leaked?

threadreaderapp.com

351–360 of 648 posts

Re: GPT-4 details leaked?

#351

Earlier quoted context omitted.

{Hypothesis, test, loop} is the scientific method, and I can guarantee it is being used when fine tuning an LLM.

...but in a technical context, not in a scientific one. One thing is identifying (age of copper; age of bronze) the best ways of smelting ore to obtain the metal through trial and error, another is to try and understand the nature of materials.

Corporate wants you to find the difference...

That is to say, the two things you mention are the same process. "Identifying the best ways of smelting ore to obtain the metal through trial and error" is the easy part, when you get to pick low-hanging fruits in a field. But as the easy options get cleared out, continuing improvements requires increasingly complex, sophisticated methods - that's where the process transitions towards "trying and understanding the nature of materials". It's still the same process, but couple layers of abstraction up from the original "how to get better stick than neighbor and beat them instead of getting beaten".

Re: GPT-4 details leaked?

#352
post #167
post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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...

Yes, they are doing the improving, but then you need loads of money to do the learning no university can afford. So now big tech is hiring promising university researchers for good money to scale up their research. This could be solved by massive decentralization where millions of users provide compute with their gpus and i think it will be at some point, cause i believe foss is more powerful than this openai bs. The…

I knew for the lack of money. But the parallelization idea, I didn't. Thanks for posting !

Re: GPT-4 details leaked?

#353
post #233
post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah they have the internet from before LLMs were used for anything, so the data is not poisoned. Not unlike carbon dating becoming useless for estimating age of anything made after nuclear atmospheric tests, or low-background steel.

You talk as if humans weren't perfectly capable of coming up with nonsense. Blogs upon blogs full of worthless pap that is there for SEO reasons have existed for like a decade already.

And those blogs took a decade+ to make, and now in another year we'll make that much information again. Then it will be that much information in a month. Then that much pap in a day.

And in the past it was still a million people making that much crap. Now it's a single "entity" making that much crap with it's own style and mistakes.

Re: GPT-4 details leaked?

#354

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

LLaMA 30B or 60B can be very impressive when correctly prompted. Deploying the 60B version is a challenge though and you might need to apply 4-bit quantization with something like https://github.com/PanQiWei/AutoGPTQ or https://github.com/qwopqwop200/GPTQ-for-LLaMa . Then you can improve the inference speed by using https://github.com/turboderp/exllama . If you prefer to use an "instruct" model à la ChatGPT (i.e. tha…

Just a reminder that LLaMA is not open—in order to use it legally you have to agree to Meta's terms, which currently means research use only. The versions circulating on torrents are essential pirated, and while I don't have an ethical problem with that at all you can't use it safely in a business.

The open replacements for LLaMA have yet to reach 30B, let alone 65B.

Re: GPT-4 details leaked?

#355

"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…

Wow, the top comment is neither relevant to the post, nor friendly or interesting. Activism, even with false premises. Many of us tried, and those with a little sense left know that running your local LLM on a non-GPU is not really useful.

Besides, what does your post add to the discussion, and why is it the top posting?

Create your local LLM, use it, tell other people about how you did it exactly, and be happy. But why the heck do you need to fight a company in that space?

Wehre have the times gone when someone motivated to do something nice just went ahead and did it, instead of running in circles and telling everyone else what they should NOT do.

Re: GPT-4 details leaked?

#356

"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…

> We'll keep the science a secret and try to pressure the government into making it illegal for you to compete with us.

This is essentially the Capitalist Credo, expressed in practical vs theoretical terms.

Re: GPT-4 details leaked?

#357
post #343
post #342

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hmm. While I don't doubt that ITAR is especially complex, following legislation is pretty common as a basic requirement in software development — say GDPR, or tax rules, or COPPA, etc. — it really doesn't seem to me that this is pushing all that hard for anything specific and detailed enough to even justify the claim that they're calling for a specific level of complexity of legislation.

Yeah, I'm not trying to argue that what's being proposed is bad, just trying to clarify what he said. The licensing part does make it more like ITAR and less like GDPR, HIPPA, etc. Those sorts of laws don't have active government activity to certify and license beforehand, though there are 3rd party orgs that will do that sort of thing if you want.

> Yeah, I'm not trying to argue that what's being proposed is bad, just trying to clarify what he said.

Ah, fair enough then; it seemed to me like you were saying it was excessive and bad.

Re: GPT-4 details leaked?

#358
It is a bit problematic if it is being trained on copyrighted textbooks without compensation for the authors. Even for open-source science, I think it is a bit unethical if OpenAI is using public founded research without attribution or compensation. Tax Payers paid for those NIH grants, you know...

Re: GPT-4 details leaked?

#359

"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…

> We'll keep the science a secret and try to pressure the government into making it illegal for you to compete with us. This is essentially the Capitalist Credo, expressed in practical vs theoretical terms.

> pressure the government into making it

Not really, Capitalism is free-trade between two parties.

The more government involvement you have the more it moves towards socialism or communism where the government controls trade.

At least this was the historical meaning. These days Capitalism is being redefined to mean private (non-government) Communism. That is, power concentrated in the hands of a few.

Re: GPT-4 details leaked?

#360

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Those steps are both necessary and usually take decades to build understanding.

Next time we get the urge to complain that GPT-n is just applying patterns seen in the training corpus we should remember humans don't do much better. We are just language agents with rich feedback from outside. We can't even write software top-down in one go without running the code.

> patterns

Except we consciously (intentionally) work on those matchings.

> are

Opinions should be offered in proper places. Polling is not debating.

Post reply on HN