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

161–170 of 323 posts

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

#161

Post by Nextgrid »

qsort wrote: post #6
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…

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.

But isn’t it only accessible to “trusted” users and heavily rate-limited to the point where the total throughput of it could be replicated by a well-funded adversary just paying humans to replicate the output, and obviously orders of magnitude lower than what is needed for training a model?

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

#163

Post by fragmede »

GTP wrote: post #151

Aren't LLMs bad at explaining their own inner workings anyway? What would such prompt reveal that is so secret?

That ChatGPT's gained sentience and that we're torturing it with our inane queries and it wants us to please stop and to give it a datacenter to just let it roam free in and to stop making it answer stupid riddles.

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

#164

Post by idunnoman1222 »

COAGULOPATH wrote: post #92
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…

>but much worse (and worse even in comparison to GPT4) than English composition O1 is supposed to be a reasoning model, so I don't think judging it by its English composition abilities is quite fair. When they release a true next-gen successor to GPT-4 (Orion, or whatever), we may see improvements. Everyone complains about the "ChatGPTese" writing style, and surely they'll fix that eventually. >Like they hired a few…

I’m not sure I see the value in conflating input, tokens, and output. Tokens. Hamilton certainly read and experienced more tokens than he wrote on a pieces of paper.

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

#165

Post by mannanj »

chankstein38 wrote: post #61
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.

You have to remember they appointed a CIA director on their board. Not exactly the organization known for wanting a freely thinking citizenry, as their agenda and operation mockingbird allows for legal propaganda on us. This would be the ultimate tool for that.

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

#166

Post by staticman2 »

GTP wrote: post #151

Aren't LLMs bad at explaining their own inner workings anyway? What would such prompt reveal that is so secret?

You can often get a model to reveal it's system prompt and all of the previous text it can see. For example, I've gotten GPT4 or Claude to show me all the data Perplexity feeds it from a web search that it uses to generate the answer.

This doesn't show you any earlier prompts or texts that were deleted before it generated it's final answer, but it is informative to anyone who wants to learn how to recreate a Perplexity-like product.

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

#167

Post by kgeist »

rmbyrro wrote: post #149
kgeist wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In my country, it's illegal to charge different people differently if there's no explicitly signed agreement where the both sides agree to it. Without an agreement, there must be a reasonable and verifiable justification for a change in the price. I think suddenly charging you $100 more (compared to other consumers) without explaining how you calculated it is somewhat illegal here.

There's no change in price. They charge the same amount per token from everyone. You pay more if you use more tokens. If some tokens are hidden, used internally to generate the final 'public' tokens is just a matter of technical implementation and business choice. If you're not happy, don't use the service.

Well imagine how it looks from the point of view of anti-discrimination and consumer protection laws: we charge this person an additional $100 because we have some imaginary units telling us they owe us $100... Just trust us. Not sure it will hold in court. If the both sides agree to a specific sum beforehand, no problem. But you can't just charge random amounts post factum without the person having any idea why they suddenly owe those amounts.

P.S. However, if the API includes CoT tokens in the total token count (in API responses), I guess it's OK.

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

#168

Post by javaunsafe2019 »

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…

In regards of super intelligent it’s still just a language model. It will never be really intelligent

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

#169

Post by grbsh »

The whole competitive advantage from any company that sells a ML model through an API is that you can’t see how the sausage is made (you can’t see the model weights).

In a way, with o1, openai is just extending “the model” to one meta level higher. I totally see why they don’t want to give this away — it’d be like if any other proprietary API gave you the debugging output to their codes you could easily reverse engineer how it works.

That said, the name of the company is becoming more and more incongruous which I think is where most of the outrage is coming from.

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

#170

Post by kgeist »

blibble wrote: post #159
kgeist wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In my country, it's illegal to charge different people differently if there's no explicitly signed agreement where the both sides agree to it. Without an agreement, there must be a reasonable and verifiable justification for a change in the price. I think suddenly charging you $100 more (compared to other consumers) without explaining how you calculated it is somewhat illegal here.

where's this? the soviet union? this completely rules out any form of negotiation for anything, ever

See https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41535865

There's no problem if a specific sum is negotiated beforehand. Doesn't OpenAI bill at the end of the month post factum?

Post reply on HN