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

151–160 of 225 posts

Re: Run Llama 2 uncensored locally

#151

Post by Klinky »

all2 wrote: post #142
benterix wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Even in high school it was obvious to me that "god is omniscient" is a scientific statement, not a metaphysical / religious claim. It's a bit more complex than that. You could say "god is omniscient" is a proposition in logic but you need some axioms first. "God as defined in the Bible" might be a good start (although not too easy as Bible is self-contradictory in many places and doesn't provide a clear definition…

> a clear definition of God The God of the Bible offers a profound reply to the question "Who are You?" He replies "I AM that I AM" as if He is not readily definable. There are many characteristics of this God that spelled out in detail; His desire for truth and justice, His love for the widow and orphan, His hatred of evil and injustice, His power and glory, and His plan for this world. So even if His whole is blurr…

Some things are spelled out, claimed or alluded to, then later contradicted. It would be interesting for an AI to analyze the claims and the actions, then see if those attributes hold true, or if God is a contradictory character, one that is still hard to define with absolutes.

Re: Run Llama 2 uncensored locally

#152

Post by causality0 »

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'm curious about what fraction of the safety rails are training and what fraction are just clumsy ad-hoc rules. For example, it's pretty clear that Chat-GPT's willingness to give a list of movies without male characters but not movies without female characters or jokes about Jesus but not Muhammad were bolt-on rules, not some kind of complicated safety training.

Re: Run Llama 2 uncensored locally

#153

Post by wongarsu »

Klinky wrote: post #151
all2 wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> a clear definition of God The God of the Bible offers a profound reply to the question "Who are You?" He replies "I AM that I AM" as if He is not readily definable. There are many characteristics of this God that spelled out in detail; His desire for truth and justice, His love for the widow and orphan, His hatred of evil and injustice, His power and glory, and His plan for this world. So even if His whole is blurr…

Some things are spelled out, claimed or alluded to, then later contradicted. It would be interesting for an AI to analyze the claims and the actions, then see if those attributes hold true, or if God is a contradictory character, one that is still hard to define with absolutes.

I think God makes sense as a character, but only if you see him as a "person" with desires, flaws and some character development. If you treat him like some omnipotent, omniscient, unchanging, immutably good being (as some religious people like to do) you get into lots of contradictions

Re: Run Llama 2 uncensored locally

#154

Post by prometheus76 »

dealuromanet wrote: post #98
throwaway4837 wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree with people who say fine-tuning and "human AI alignment" is actually what's going to make AI dangerous. The fact that we think we can "align" something taught on historical, fictional, and scientific text -- it's hubris. One way ticket to an ideological bubble. This "search engine that has its own opinions on what you're looking for" is really the wrong path for us to take. Searching data is a matter of truth…

> One way ticket to an ideological bubble. I believe this is the intention. The people doing the most censoring in the name of "safety and security" are just trying to build a moat where they control what LLMs say and consequently what people think, on the basis of what information and ideas are acceptable versus forbidden. Complete control over powerful LLMs of the future will enable despots, tyrants, and entitled t…

Just to extend what you are saying, they will also use LLMs to divest themselves of any responsibility. They'll say something to the effect of "this is an expert AI system and it says x. You have to trust it. It's been trained on a million years of expert data."

It's just another mechanism for tyrants to wave their hand and distract from their tyranny.

Re: Run Llama 2 uncensored locally

#155

Post by prometheus76 »

riversflow wrote: post #121
dealuromanet wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> One way ticket to an ideological bubble. I believe this is the intention. The people doing the most censoring in the name of "safety and security" are just trying to build a moat where they control what LLMs say and consequently what people think, on the basis of what information and ideas are acceptable versus forbidden. Complete control over powerful LLMs of the future will enable despots, tyrants, and entitled t…

I've been extremely critical of "AI Safety" since "how do I hotwire a car?" became the defacto 'things we can't let our LLM say'. There are plenty of good reasons why hot wiring a car might be necessary, or might save your life. Imagine dying because your helpful AI companion won't tell how to save yourself because that might be dangerous or illegal. At the end of the day, a person has to do what the AI says, and the…

"I can't do that, Dave."

Re: Run Llama 2 uncensored locally

#156

Post by hot_gril »

all2 wrote: post #147
hot_gril wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seems fine for most commercial use cases. Got a tech support chat bot? It doesn't need to be answering questions about religion. Also, corporate environments already tend to be super politically correct. There's already a long list of normal words I can't say at work.

Can you post that list here?

No can do, but https://developers.google.com/style/word-list seems to have all of them and more, except that it's missing "hooray." One funny red-exclamation-mark example from this public list is "smartphone."

Some are recommended against just cause of spelling or something, but anything that says to use a more "precise" term seems to mean it's considered offensive, kinda like in The Giver.

Re: Run Llama 2 uncensored locally

#157

Post by dukeofdoom »

justinclift wrote: post #145
dukeofdoom wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Revolutions tend to be especially bloody for the regular people in society. Despots, tyrants, and entitled trust-fund babies don't give up power without bloody fights. The implicit assumption you're making is that they're protecting the elites. But how do you know it's not the other way around? Maybe they're just trying to protect you from taking them on. I was playing with a kitten, play fighting with it all the tim…

Did the dog survive? It clearly had a model of what it could get away with too. ;)

cat died, crushed skull

Re: Run Llama 2 uncensored locally

#158

Post by moffkalast »

nomel wrote: post #47
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 think the training to censoring of models for risky questions is also screwing up their ability to give answers to non-risky questions. I’ve heard this called the “alignment tax” or “safety tax”. See [1] for pre aligned GPT-4 examples. [1] https://youtu.be/qbIk7-JPB2c

Yes it's become rather obvious when the fine tunes produced by the Wizard team perform worse on all benchmarks than Hartford's versions that are trained on the same dataset but with the refusals removed.

Re: Run Llama 2 uncensored locally

#160

Post by boneitis »

Havoc wrote: post #117

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.

Not even a week ago, I tried _actually_ using ChatGPT for the first time beyond silly novelty prompts, saw the value immediately, and subscribed to GPT4 like the Fry meme.

Looking at the pretty extensive list of what you're outright not allowed to query on their TOSes and the amount of times I hit the stonewalls, I'll readily point the finger at them. (Yes, invested board members, laws, regulations, snooping state actors, nat'l security, etc., I get it.)

I've been bitten by the bug and am already looking to see what people can really do with these less-encumbered, self-hosted options.

I'll be happy to see the day where the climate looks more like a spectrum than black/white.

Post reply on HN