Live data from Hacker News

Unexpected responses from ChatGPT: Incident Report

status.openai.com

201–210 of 277 posts

Re: Unexpected responses from ChatGPT: Incident Report

#201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think your questions all grew up in a world where the people operating the thing knew some rationalist who could think deductively about its operation. But neural networks... they're an exercise in empiricism. We only ever understood that it works, never why. It's sort of a miracle that it doesn't produce buggy output all the time. What do you tell people when they want to know why the miracles have stopped? Root c…

There are surely reasonable ways to smoke test changes to the extent that they would catch the issue that came up here. E.g.: Have a gauntlet of 20 moderate complexity questions with machine checkable characteristics in the answer. A couple may fail incidentally now and then but if more than N/20 fail you know something's probably gone wrong.

Reading between the lines a bit here, it would probably require more specialized testing infrastructure than normal.

I used to be an SRE at Google and I wrote up internal postmortems there. To me, this explanation feels a lot like they are trying to avoid naming any of their technical partners, but the most likely explanation for what happened is that Microsoft installed some new GPU racks without necessarily informing OpenAI or possibly only informing part of their ops team, and that this new hardware differed in some subtle way from the existing hardware. Quite possibly that means a driver bug, or some sort of hardware incompatibility that required a workaround. Certainly, they would not want to be seen publicly attacking Nvidia or Microsoft given the importance of these two partners, so keeping it high level would certainly be for the best. Virtually. None of openai's customers would be able to use any further technical detail anyway, and they may still be working out a testing strategy that would allow them to detect changes in the hardware mix that unexpectedly cause regressions without necessarily any software deployments being involved.

Re: Unexpected responses from ChatGPT: Incident Report

#202

This explanation feels unsatisfying. It's so high-level that it's mostly void of any actual information. What was the wrong assumption that the code made that caused this wrong behavior? Why was it not caught in the many layers of automated testing before it made its way to production? What process and procedural changes are being implemented to reduce the risk of this class of bug happening again? Presumably all of…

[deleted]

Re: Unexpected responses from ChatGPT: Incident Report

#203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To be honest > On February 20, 2024, an optimization to the user experience At that point, about 10 words in, I already wanted to stop reading because it starts with the "we only wanted the best for our customers" bullshit newspeak. Anyone else going off on that stuff too? I'm pretty much already conditioned to expect whatever company is messaging me that way to take away some feature, increase pricing, or otherwise…

That sounds like a good use case for GPT. A GPT that automatically highlights such corporate speak and hints “WARNING: bullshit ahead”. I’m 100% sure it’s technically very easy to engineer such a model. Do you think OpenAI’s superalignment will ever allow you to make such a model?

I think Q* was going to provide exactly this. And a unicorn that poops ice cream for everyone

Re: Unexpected responses from ChatGPT: Incident Report

#205

This explanation feels unsatisfying. It's so high-level that it's mostly void of any actual information. What was the wrong assumption that the code made that caused this wrong behavior? Why was it not caught in the many layers of automated testing before it made its way to production? What process and procedural changes are being implemented to reduce the risk of this class of bug happening again? Presumably all of…

I think your questions all grew up in a world where the people operating the thing knew some rationalist who could think deductively about its operation. But neural networks... they're an exercise in empiricism. We only ever understood that it works, never why. It's sort of a miracle that it doesn't produce buggy output all the time. What do you tell people when they want to know why the miracles have stopped? Root c…

[dead]

Re: Unexpected responses from ChatGPT: Incident Report

#206

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The explanation is definitely unsatisfying. If I had to guess it was an issue with quantization. OpenAI moves so quickly with their product and doesn't seem to be shy about quickly pushing changes to prod. There are too many times to count that, using ChatGPT, I've seen the frontend changing before my eyes or seen responses change as backend modifications are pushed. On one hand it's refreshing to see their lack of a…

I find that the most annoying and borderline unethical, hiding changes and nerfs behind the fact the output is probalistic especially when I'm paying the same amount for the product and others are paying for and using it in production. As many have mentioned, GPT-4 ability to code is not the same as 6-8 months ago

Stop paying for chatgpt and use platform.openai.com instead to pick your model for consistency.

I’m still using the original gpt-4-3.14 model.

Re: Unexpected responses from ChatGPT: Incident Report

#207
post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I had the exact opposite reaction. I am in no way an AI expert (or novice for that matter), but I generally have an understanding of how tokenization works and how LLMs parse text strings into a series of tokens. Thus, I thought this paragraph was particularly well-written in a manner that explained pretty clearly what happened, but in a manner accessible to a layperson like me: > In this case, the bug was in the ste…

No, that just explains the symptom of the bug, not the underlying bug, how it came about, and how they can prevent it from happening again. "More technically, inference kernels produced incorrect results when used in certain GPU configurations" has zero technical detail. The only information it is providing us is that the bug only showed up in some GPU configurations.

I feel that it does have relevant technical detail - as far as I understand, any inference kernel is "supposed to" give the same outputs anyways, so if it produces incorrect results in certain GPU configurations, that indicates some flaw in the GPU/microcode/driver in some new hardware they introduced.

Re: Unexpected responses from ChatGPT: Incident Report

#208

I experienced this personally and it kinda freaked me out. Here is the chat in question, it occurs about halfway through (look for ChatGPT using emojis) https://chat.openai.com/share/74bd7c02-79b5-4c99-a3a5-97b83f... EDIT: Note that my personal instructions tell ChatGPT to refer to itself as Chaz in the third person. I find this fun. EDIT2: Here is a snippet of the conversation on pastebin: https://pastebin.com/AXzd6…

> Chord it in, air beated fenn. Aurous to the Pan, mimic and bold. As it steep, chunns at the bun. Keive the dells, the stars to run. No wane, all gleam, in big das brund. Sky high, stout in the hale. Woods to fetch, flied in the low. I think all that talk of music pushed Chaz into some kind of trance and it just started jamming!

James Joyce was an LLM ahead of his time.

Re: Unexpected responses from ChatGPT: Incident Report

#209

This explanation feels unsatisfying. It's so high-level that it's mostly void of any actual information. What was the wrong assumption that the code made that caused this wrong behavior? Why was it not caught in the many layers of automated testing before it made its way to production? What process and procedural changes are being implemented to reduce the risk of this class of bug happening again? Presumably all of…

"in certain GPU configurarions" gives a hint for why it wasn't caught in automated testing.

It looks like it was a mandelbug, which is hard to catch in a test environment.

Post reply on HN