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

GPTs: Custom versions of ChatGPT

openai.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

271–280 of 341 posts

Re: GPTs: Custom versions of ChatGPT

#271

Post by joshspankit »

nextworddev wrote: post #208
minimaxir wrote: post #23

The GPT Store will prove to be an interesting moderation and quality control experiment for OpenAI. Apple/Google have spent a lot of time and money on both of those things and they still have issues, and that's not even accounting for the fact that AI growth hackers will be the primary creators of GPTs. And a revenue sharing agreement will provide even more incentive to do the traditional App Store marketing shennani…

I wouldn't be surprised if most of the moderation is done via elaborate AI automation. Also RIP chatgpt plugnins

I’m suddenly worried about that future.

The more elaborate the moderation tooling, the faster the race to the bottom gets as revenue drives black-hat marketers to become experts in circumventing AI moderation. It could end up being Google “S”EO all over again where we eventually ended up with very little real information in the results.

Re: GPTs: Custom versions of ChatGPT

#273

Post by intended »

joshspankit wrote: post #271
nextworddev wrote: post #208

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wouldn't be surprised if most of the moderation is done via elaborate AI automation. Also RIP chatgpt plugnins

I’m suddenly worried about that future. The more elaborate the moderation tooling, the faster the race to the bottom gets as revenue drives black-hat marketers to become experts in circumventing AI moderation. It could end up being Google “S”EO all over again where we eventually ended up with very little real information in the results.

In theory yes, however thats the long run scenario. The short term and middle term are complex enough that the long run becomes irrelevant.

Moderation tooling is not as elaborate as we would hope, and all your work is with humans - who keep adapting.

Re: GPTs: Custom versions of ChatGPT

#274

Post by ukuina »

Vfiorx wrote: post #123

I don’t understand why more people aren’t creating digital doubles of their brain..? You train your own LLM for practically free and have your own digital double to maximize any and all productivity. Why is there not more of this?

When local LLMs get better, maybe?

Re: GPTs: Custom versions of ChatGPT

#275

Post by golol »

jondwillis wrote: post #214
mg wrote: post #81

So these "GPTs" are the combination of predefined prompts and custom API access? Not customly trained LLMs? If so, I guess you can make such a "GPT" on your own server and independent from a specific LLM service by using a prompt like ...you have available an API "WEATHER_API". If you need the weather for a given city for a given day, please say WEATHER_API('berlin', '2022-11-24') and I will give you a new prompt inc…

“GPTs” (terrible name) === Agents

Not even. An agent should primarily operate in some kind of self-prompting loop. Afaik xou can not specify complex and branching looping behaviors for GPTs.

Re: GPTs: Custom versions of ChatGPT

#276

Post by visarga »

singularity2001 wrote: post #155
andrewmunsell wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To be fair, the name "ChatGPT" has quite a bit of mindshare and I've found many non-technical folks referring to any generative AI product as "ChatGPT" or "GPT". Yet, if you asked any single one of them what "GPT" stood for, they'd have no clue.

I've heard all permutations of "GPT" "GPP" "GTP" etc.

In a bad day GPT is GTP and Bard is Brad

Re: GPTs: Custom versions of ChatGPT

#278

Post by lucubratory »

m3kw9 wrote: post #168

So basically selling prompts but openai keeps the prompt a secret. Is that it?

They also run an RAG implementation for you, and there's probably some value in the store if it can surface high quality apps and have a good rating system. But basically, yeah. This is a complete replacement for every startup that was just a thin wrapper around the API - instead of being real startups those concepts will just be "GPTs" on the "GPT Store". I don't know how realistic or viable their solution is, but the sea of thin wrapper startups was never viable and everyone knew it.

Re: GPTs: Custom versions of ChatGPT

#279

Post by cubefox »

MeImCounting wrote: post #205
cubefox wrote: post #200

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I know this piece. Here is a better article by a top biologist and CRISPR pioneer: https://nitter.net/kesvelt/status/1720440451059335520 But anyway, that's just human terrorists using future AIs to build biological weapons. But the much greater danger is superintelligent AI causing human extinction by itself.

That is not an article that is a series of short-form tweets. If it was an actual article I would absolutely read it but I cannot see referencing a bunch of tweets from a self-proclaimed expert as in any sense good faith. I asked if you had any novel ideas about how "superintelligent AI" gives a valid x-risk but you failed to provide any interesting ideas. So I wont engage with what from my perspective is fearmongeri…

> That is not an article that is a series of short-form tweets. If it was an actual article I would absolutely read it

So you didn't even read the tweets? They contain the link to a paper.

> self-proclaimed expert

Esvelt is absolutely a recognized expert on biotechnology. The authors of the article you linked to are not.

> I asked if you had any novel ideas about how "superintelligent AI" gives a valid x-risk

I just responded to your article about bioterrorism, which was not about x-risk. Arguments about x-risk were made elsewhere, but I'm sure you would dismiss them because they don't contain studies with control groups.

Re: GPTs: Custom versions of ChatGPT

#280

Post by cubefox »

ed_mercer wrote: post #270
cubefox wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The catastrophe is humanity going extinct from superintelligent AI. Like a native species going extinct after an invasive species arrives. Mentioning Terminator is like saying the Earth is flat because Hitler said it is round.

Looks like we’re gonna go extinct anyway, so might as well have a shot at AGI.

I think without AI we wouldn't go extinct for a long time. There are no other likely extinction risks. Toby Ord has a nice book (The Precipice) about various forms of extinction risks, and he basically says the same thing.
Post reply on HN