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

GPT-3.5 Turbo fine-tuning and API updates

openai.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 244 posts

Re: GPT-3.5 Turbo fine-tuning and API updates

#191

Post by speedgoose »

lynx23 wrote: post #187
speedgoose wrote: post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do people really wish for OpenAI models to output healthcare advices without disclaimers, plans to end humanity, child porn fictions, torture instruction books, and similar? The minute it happens without complicated bypasses, the society would say stop to generative ai, and rightfully so. Many people already got spoked when they tricked ChatGPT to say/repeat scary things.

You forgot to list the most hypocritical--american--topic filtered, erotic content. I know, the american world will go down in flames if a generative AI ever outputs something sexy. You can google all these scary things these days already. And prior to that, you could go to a bookstore and find most of what you mentioned. Or go to asstr.org for your fucked up sex stories Pretending a content filter on a generative AI…

I’m saying that no content filter would make things worse because it would make the technology not acceptable.

Re: GPT-3.5 Turbo fine-tuning and API updates

#192

Post by predmijat »

pocket_cheese wrote: post #184
victor106 wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>And OpenAI continues to ship. This. Google (specifically their CEO) was saying since at least 2016 that "Google is an AI first company". (Whatever the hell that means). But they had no product to show for and they are on the verge of being the next IBM.

I have lots of criticisms of Google, but let's not forget they have Gmail + workspaces,Google Domains, Android, Google Cloud, Google Fiber, Google Fi, The pixel, Nest, Maps, Youtube, Fitbit, and probably the browser 90% of people on here are using. Would losing search devastate them? Absolutely, but they're not exactly IBM levels of irrelevance without it.

Google Domains is sold to Sqaurespace and at least 3 of the things you mentioned are a drop in the ocean.

Re: GPT-3.5 Turbo fine-tuning and API updates

#194

Post by huijzer »

steno132 wrote: post #129

And OpenAI continues to ship. As promised, they released GPT3.5 fine-tuning today. They opened GPT4 API access a few months ago. In a few months, they'll release GPT4 fine-tuning. Many favor open source AI, and criticize OpenAI for not being open enough. But the most important thing is, OpenAI innovates. Fast. Llama, Bard, FB's open source stuff is good but it's lightyears behind OpenAI. You have to credit them for t…

Still I was promised immense productivity by their tools, but I do keep seeing bugs in the ChatGPT interface. So they themselves seem not so productive? When seeing their tools as slightly productivity increasing, then they are good.

Re: GPT-3.5 Turbo fine-tuning and API updates

#195

Post by bambax »

Could someone explain in simple terms exactly what fine-tuning does?

Does it show the model how to answer questions, or does it give it new information, or both? Is there a way to restrict answers to the fine-tuned data?

For example, if one would want to use an LLM to answer questions regarding a large, private knowledge base, would it make sense to fine-tune a model on this knowledge base?

If yes, how does one reduce hallucination? And would that perform better than feeding possible source documents as part of the prompt every time?

Re: GPT-3.5 Turbo fine-tuning and API updates

#196

Post by skerit »

bambax wrote: post #195

Could someone explain in simple terms exactly what fine-tuning does? Does it show the model how to answer questions, or does it give it new information, or both? Is there a way to restrict answers to the fine-tuned data? For example, if one would want to use an LLM to answer questions regarding a large, private knowledge base, would it make sense to fine-tune a model on this knowledge base? If yes, how does one reduc…

> For example, if one would want to use an LLM to answer questions regarding a large, private knowledge base, would it make sense to fine-tune a model on this knowledge base?

I initially also thought this would be one of the best use cases for fine-tuning (teaching the model new data), but I've seen quite a few people say fine-tuning should not be used to teach the model new data, but more like new formatting and style of response. This blog post seems to concur.

I do wonder how OpenAI does fine-tuning. I'm guessing it doesn't use Lora.

Re: GPT-3.5 Turbo fine-tuning and API updates

#197

Post by CMCDragonkai »

zarzavat wrote: post #131
Sohcahtoa82 wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Has anyone successfully bypassed the current Ai detectors using fine-tuned models? Current AI detectors are pure garbage. Anybody paying for one is getting scammed. Anybody using one to actually make decisions is making a grave error. It's a real shame that some schools are using AI detectors to detect students using ChatGPT to write essays for them, because there have been many cases where the detectors flag essay…

It’s also completely impossible to detect “centaur” works which are a joint effort by human and computer. Where do you even draw the line? I use LLMs when I write as a tool to help me generate new ideas and find better word choices. If I were a student I would want to use the hell out of this, it really takes the drudgery out of writing.

They shouldn't draw the line. To do so is to basically become Amish. Fine if you like that lifestyle, but not if you're trying to teach the next generation. Human augmentation is the future.

Re: GPT-3.5 Turbo fine-tuning and API updates

#198

Post by bratbag »

Havoc wrote: post #104
htrp wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This one seems to be a deal-breaker, if you already know what types of language you want, why would you want openai moderating your parameter tuning set.

Why do you care at all, let alone "dealbreaker". You need a model specifically fine tuned towards something dangerous?

I need a model where I get to define what is dangerous, without someone else thought policing.

Re: GPT-3.5 Turbo fine-tuning and API updates

#199

Post by easygenes »

SparkyMcUnicorn wrote: post #91
thumbsup-_- wrote: post #78

Can anyone share their thoughts on how does this compare to fine-tuning Llama2 13B or 70B which usually requires renting GPUs from one of the cloud providers? In case of openAI, the infra doesn't needs to be rented but the cost is covered in usage pricing but want to hear from someone who has experience fine-tuning Llama2 models that how it compares.

I haven't fine-tuned GPT-3.5-turbo yet, but overall llama2 is probably going to be cheaper. Especially if 13B is good enough for you. You can get roughly $0.003/1K tokens using modal.com for inference on a fine-tuned llama2 13B model, and there's definitely cheaper options available. Unless you have a ton of data, the cost for training llama2 is usually a few dollars.

I'm curious about this. Can you point me to, e.g. some example code for setting up an inference endpoint with a base llama2 model on modal.com?

Re: GPT-3.5 Turbo fine-tuning and API updates

#200

Post by matheusmoreira »

bennyschmidt wrote: post #114

GPT 3.5 is so bad it's useless to me - for writing it's too repetitive of the same kind of jargon, for coding it's wrong way too often. The NLP is also worse, I have to be more explicit. It's just an average chat bot IMO. GPT 4 @ $20/mo. is significantly better at everything, I use it for doing stuff in Angular lol - when you have an AI explaining the why behind everything, this over-engineered mess of a framework st…

I wish I could point the AI at huge GitHub codebases and have it explain the whole thing to me. Would make contributing to open source software so much easier.
Post reply on HN