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

OpenAI threatens to revoke o1 access for asking it about its chain of thought

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 323 posts

Re: OpenAI threatens to revoke o1 access for asking it about its chain of thought

#61

Post by chankstein38 »

islewis wrote: post #52

The words "internal thought process" seem to flag my questions. Just asking for an explanation of thoughts doesn't. If I ask for an explanation of "internal feelings" next to a math questions, I get this interesting snippet back inside of the "Thought for n seconds" block: > Identifying and solving > I’m mapping out the real roots of the quadratic polynomial 6x^2 + 5x + 1, ensuring it’s factorized into irreducible el…

They figured out how to make it completely useless I guess. I was disappointed but not surprised when they said they weren't going to show us chain of thought. I assumed we'd still be able to ask clarifying questions but apparently they forgot that's how people learn. Or they know and they would rather we just turn to them for our every thought instead of learning on our own.

Re: OpenAI threatens to revoke o1 access for asking it about its chain of thought

#62

Post by tivert »

mjburgess wrote: post #8
qsort wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Occam's razor: there is no secret sauce and they're afraid someone trains a model on the output like what happened soon after the release of GPT-4. They basically said as much in the official announcement, you hardly even have to read between the lines.

Yip. It's pretty obvious this 'innovation' is just based off training data collected from chain-of-thought prompting by people, ie., the 'big leap forward' is just another dataset of people repairing chatgpt's lack of reasoning capabilities. No wonder then, that many of the benchmarks they've tested on would be no doubt, in that very training dataset, repaired expertly by people running those benchmarks on chatgpt. T…

> Yip. It's pretty obvious this 'innovation' is just based off training data collected from chain-of-thought prompting by people, ie., the 'big leap forward' is just another dataset of people repairing chatgpt's lack of reasoning capabilities.

Which would be ChatGPT chat logs, correct?

It would be interesting if people started feeding ChatGPT deliberately bad repairs due it's "lack of reasoning capabilities" (e.g. get a local LLM setup with some response delays to simulate a human and just let it talk and talk and talk to ChatGPT), and see how it affects its behavior over the long run.

Re: OpenAI threatens to revoke o1 access for asking it about its chain of thought

#64

Post by Skyy93 »

darby_nine wrote: post #21

"chain of thought" is just search, right? Wouldn't it make sense to tailor the search with heuristics relevant to the problem at hand?

No it is not just search. Chain of thought is the generation of new context from the inputs combined with a divide and conquer strategy. The model does not really searches it just breaks the problem in smaller chunks.

Re: OpenAI threatens to revoke o1 access for asking it about its chain of thought

#65

Post by tough »

GaggiX wrote: post #47
DiscourseFan wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It seems like the best AI models are increasingly just combinations of writings of various people thrown together. Like they hired a few hundred professors, journalists and writers to work with the model and create material for it, so you just get various combinations of their contributions. It's very telling that this model, for instance, is extraordinarily good at STEM related queries, but much worse (and worse eve…

Do you have a source about OpenAI hiring a few hundred professors, journalists and writers? Because I honestly doubt.

Just all their chatgpt customers

Re: OpenAI threatens to revoke o1 access for asking it about its chain of thought

#66

Post by COAGULOPATH »

GaggiX wrote: post #47
DiscourseFan wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It seems like the best AI models are increasingly just combinations of writings of various people thrown together. Like they hired a few hundred professors, journalists and writers to work with the model and create material for it, so you just get various combinations of their contributions. It's very telling that this model, for instance, is extraordinarily good at STEM related queries, but much worse (and worse eve…

Do you have a source about OpenAI hiring a few hundred professors, journalists and writers? Because I honestly doubt.

I've heard rumors that GPT4's training data included "a custom dataset of college textbooks", curated by hand. Nothing beyond that.

https://www.reddit.com/r/mlscaling/comments/14wcy7m/comment/...

Re: OpenAI threatens to revoke o1 access for asking it about its chain of thought

#69

Post by n42 »

tptacek wrote: post #57
contravariant wrote: post #4

Okay this is just getting suspicious. Their excuses for keeping the chain of thought hidden are dubious at best [1], and honestly just seemed anti-competitive if anything. Worst is their argument that they want to monitor it for attempts to escape the prompt, but you can't. However the weirdest is that they note that: > for this to work the model must have freedom to express its thoughts in unaltered form, so we cann…

What do you mean, "anti-competitive"? There is no rule of competition that says you need to reveal trade secrets to your competitors.

isn't it such that saying something is anti-competitive doesn't necessarily mean 'in violation of antitrust laws'? it usually implies it, but I think you can be anti-competitive without breaking any rules (or laws).

I do think it's sort of unproductive/inflammatory in the OP, it isn't really nefarious not to want people to have easy access to your secret sauce.

Re: OpenAI threatens to revoke o1 access for asking it about its chain of thought

#70

Post by mattkrause »

GaggiX wrote: post #47
DiscourseFan wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It seems like the best AI models are increasingly just combinations of writings of various people thrown together. Like they hired a few hundred professors, journalists and writers to work with the model and create material for it, so you just get various combinations of their contributions. It's very telling that this model, for instance, is extraordinarily good at STEM related queries, but much worse (and worse eve…

Do you have a source about OpenAI hiring a few hundred professors, journalists and writers? Because I honestly doubt.

A few recruiters have contacted me (a scientist) about doing RLHF and annotation on biomedical tasks. I don’t know if the eventual client was OpenAI or some other LLM provider but they seemed to have money to burn.
Post reply on HN