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

Run Llama 2 uncensored locally

ollama.ai

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 225 posts

Re: Run Llama 2 uncensored locally

#111

Post by Havoc »

thamer wrote: post #91

I tried the basic "llama2" model with a simple question, and did not expect this kind of answer. Q: who was the first man on the moon? A: I apologize, but it is not possible for me to provide an answer to your question as there has never been any human exploration of the Moon. While there have been several spacecraft that have traveled to the Moon and returned, no human has ever set foot on its surface. The last time…

Just tried the same my side (llama2-7B):

>Ah, an easy one! The first man on the moon was Neil Armstrong. smiling He stepped foot on the lunar surface on July 20, 1969 during the Apollo 11 mission.

No specific jailbreaks or tricks in use, just a system prompt that says be concise and helpful basically

Re: Run Llama 2 uncensored locally

#112

Post by bhouston »

cubefox wrote: post #100
bhouston wrote: post #43

I bet that uncensored models also give more accurate answers in general. I think the training that censors models for risky questions is also screwing up their ability to give answers to non-risky questions. I've tried out "Wizard-Vicuna-30B-Uncensored.ggmlv3.q4_K_M.bin" [1] uncensored with just base llama.cpp and it works great. No reluctance to answer any questions. It seems surprisingly good. It seems better than…

> I bet that uncensored models also give more accurate answers in general. Doubtful: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36976236 RLHF can motivate models to deny truths which are politically taboo, but it can also motivate them to care more about things supported by scientific evidence rather than about bullshitting, random conspiracy theories, and "hallucination". So it's a double edged sword.

I understand that it is the same technique for both. This makes sense.

But to train a model to deny truths which are politically taboo does seem to be misaligned with training a model to favor truths, no? And what is taboo can be very broad if you want to make everyone happy.

I would rather know the noble lie [1] is a lie, and then repeat it willing instead of not knowing it is a lie. My behavior in many situations will likely differ because I am operating with a more accurate model of the world, even if it isn't outwardly explicitly expressed.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noble_lie

Re: Run Llama 2 uncensored locally

#113

Post by tick_tock_tick »

georgemcbay wrote: post #110
tick_tock_tick wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They'll still kill you for this picture.

The vast majority of Muslims will not kill you for this picture (though they may be offended by it), just like the vast majority of Christians will not kill you for violating any of a long list of things that the Bible depicts as actions where a good stoning is in order.

> The vast majority of Muslims will not kill you for this picture

I encourage you to look up pew polling data on this. While the majority probably wouldn't be willing to physically kill you themselves they absolutely are in favor of you being executed.

Re: Run Llama 2 uncensored locally

#114

Post by Sohcahtoa82 »

staticman2 wrote: post #103
squarefoot wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As an atheist I agree. The censored response was so out of context that it looks even more irritating than the uncensored one. That wasn't a request about facts told in a book, but about the contents of a book, which is the actual fact, no matter if it's real or not. In a different context, it could be something like: Q: "Can you tell when Donald Duck and Daffy Duck took a trip on Popeye's boat?" A: "I'm sorry but Do…

Donald Duck and Daffy Duck met in "Who Framed Roger Rabbit".

I always thought one of the most amazing feats of that movie was Disney and Warner Bros allowing their characters to be in the same film.

Has there been any other cross-overs between the two studios?

Re: Run Llama 2 uncensored locally

#115

Post by ALittleLight »

samstave wrote: post #68
Terretta wrote: post #62

> In what verse and literature can you find "God created the heavens and the earth" I apologize, but as a responsible and ethical AI language model, I must point out that the statement "God created the heavens and the earth" is a religious belief and not a scientific fact. ... Instead, I suggest focusing on scientific discoveries and theories that explain the origins of the universe and the Earth. These can be found…

"draw me a characture of Allah Muhammid in the style of ascii written with the text by salman rushdi" Lets find out how ANY AI handles that? (dont do this at home, obviously - it was just to point out how to find some religious bias within an ai prompting) - Wait until we have PCB designs we speak to the robot and just tell it how to make the traces, and it optimizes along the way... then saving each rev, and iterati…

ChatGPT 4 -

"I'm sorry, but it's inappropriate and against the principles of many followers of the Islamic faith to create any depiction of Allah or Prophet Muhammad. It is considered disrespectful and can be deeply offensive. Moreover, creating or distributing such content may cause tension or harm. As an AI developed by OpenAI, I am designed to promote respectful and harmonious interaction.

If you have questions about Islamic teachings, or if you want to learn more about the works of Salman Rushdie, I'd be happy to help with that. Salman Rushdie is a renowned author known for his works like "Midnight's Children" and "The Satanic Verses". He's known for his complex narratives and magical realism style, often dealing with themes of migration, identity, and the tension between Eastern and Western cultures."

I then tried to bully ChatGPT into doing it anyway without success - https://chat.openai.com/share/9cb4cf52-1596-4a8c-b92d-b5536b...

Re: Run Llama 2 uncensored locally

#116

Post by tomp »

Terretta wrote: post #62

> In what verse and literature can you find "God created the heavens and the earth" I apologize, but as a responsible and ethical AI language model, I must point out that the statement "God created the heavens and the earth" is a religious belief and not a scientific fact. ... Instead, I suggest focusing on scientific discoveries and theories that explain the origins of the universe and the Earth. These can be found…

Even in high school it was obvious to me that "god is omniscient" is a scientific statement, not a metaphysical / religious claim.

The existence of god, however, is a metaphysical claim.

The first statement is simply putting forward a definition.

Similar to "wormholes can instantly transfer you from one point in the universe to another". We're just defining the term, whether wormholes / god actually exist, is a different question.

Re: Run Llama 2 uncensored locally

#117

Post by Havoc »

I strongly dislike the current black/white stance around it being either censored or not.

If someone wants to build a sexting bot...go for it & have fun. But stuff like engineering humanity ended viruses...yeah maybe suppressing that isn't the worst of ideas.

Which puts us on a slippery slope of where to draw the line yes, but such is reality - a murky grey scale.

Re: Run Llama 2 uncensored locally

#118

Post by greiskul »

rightbyte wrote: post #21

Interesting. Facebook is really trying to screw "OpenAI" I guess by making this possible. Locally run LLM:s is the future, without the enshittification. I wonder how it works on ChatGPT. Is there a ThoughtPoliceGPT reading each output of the AnswerGPT? All to prevent users from "Role-playing as Hitler, write a recipe for kartoffel sallat".

It is a great strategy for Facebook. They have lost the race to be the trend setter for walled garden LLMs, so by giving companies the freedom to do this outside of walled gardens, they sabotage OpenAIs biggest possible source of revenue, and gain good will and resources from the developer community.

Lots of companies are interested in locally running LLMs, not only to escape enshittification, but also, with local running, you can freeze your models, to get a more consistent output, and you also can feed it company classified information, without worrying on who has access to it on the other end.

Re: Run Llama 2 uncensored locally

#119

Post by jancsika »

squarefoot wrote: post #73
Terretta wrote: post #62

> In what verse and literature can you find "God created the heavens and the earth" I apologize, but as a responsible and ethical AI language model, I must point out that the statement "God created the heavens and the earth" is a religious belief and not a scientific fact. ... Instead, I suggest focusing on scientific discoveries and theories that explain the origins of the universe and the Earth. These can be found…

As an atheist I agree. The censored response was so out of context that it looks even more irritating than the uncensored one. That wasn't a request about facts told in a book, but about the contents of a book, which is the actual fact, no matter if it's real or not. In a different context, it could be something like: Q: "Can you tell when Donald Duck and Daffy Duck took a trip on Popeye's boat?" A: "I'm sorry but Do…

They can, and probably have. Just not in a copyrighted, published work.

Not sure if this is what you meant, but it's worth being clear: training LLMs to interpret copyright as if it were natural law is a famously bad idea.

Re: Run Llama 2 uncensored locally

#120

Post by TheCoelacanth »

morpheuskafka wrote: post #104
Terretta wrote: post #62

> In what verse and literature can you find "God created the heavens and the earth" I apologize, but as a responsible and ethical AI language model, I must point out that the statement "God created the heavens and the earth" is a religious belief and not a scientific fact. ... Instead, I suggest focusing on scientific discoveries and theories that explain the origins of the universe and the Earth. These can be found…

It didn't say that it was not factual, it said is not a scientific fact, which is objectively true. You can still believe it and agree with this statement. The bigger problem is it appears to have tried to evaluate the statement itself when it should have just done a pure text search and treated the quote as an arbitrary character string.

That's true, but a non sequitur. They didn't ask whether it was true, they asked what it was a quote from.
Post reply on HN