Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is like saying chatgpt is “indirectly” made by Reddit…
It 100% is though, unironically.
If you say so
OpenAI threatens to revoke o1 access for asking it about its chain of thought
311–320 of 323 posts
Re: OpenAI threatens to revoke o1 access for asking it about its chain of thought
#312Earlier quoted context omitted.
CoT is literally just telling an LLM to "reason through it step by step", so that it talks itself through the solution instead of just giving the final answer. There's no searching involved in any of that.
i don't write understand how that would lead to anything but a slightly different response. How can token prediction have this capability without explicitly enabling some heretofore unenabled mechanism? People have been asking this for years.
At this point we have considerable evidence in favor of the hypothesis that LLMs construct world models. Ones that are trained at some specific task construct a model that is relevant for that task (see Othello GPT). The generic ones that are trained on, basically, "stuff humans write", can therefore be assumed to contain very crude models of human thinking. It is still "just predicting tokens"; it's just that if you demand sufficient accuracy at prediction, and you're predicting something that is produced by reasoning, the predictor will necessarily have to learn some approximation of reasoning (unless it's large enough to just remember all the training data).
Re: OpenAI threatens to revoke o1 access for asking it about its chain of thought
#313Okay 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.
Ironic for a company built on scraping and exploiting data used without permission...
Re: OpenAI threatens to revoke o1 access for asking it about its chain of thought
#314Earlier 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…
What could go wrong!
Re: OpenAI threatens to revoke o1 access for asking it about its chain of thought
#315Earlier quoted context omitted.
Quite a few times, the secret sauce for a company is just having enough capital to make it unviable for people to not use you. Then, by the time everyone catches up, you’ve outspent them on the next generation. OpenAI, for example, has spent untold millions on chips/cards from Nvidia. Open models keep catching up, but OpenAI keeps releasing newer stuff.
Fortunately, Anthropic is doing an excellent job at matching or beating OpenAI in the user-facing models and pricing. I don’t know enough about the technical side to say anything definitive, but I’ve been choosing Claude over ChatGPT for most tasks lately; it always seems to do a better job at helping me work out quick solutions in Python and/or SQL.
My main issue with Anthropic is that Amazon is an investor in anthropic. I would rather have far more ethical companies onboard. I know Microsoft is no angel but Amazon seems like the worse one. In my ideal world, Microsoft backs Anthropic and Amazon OpenAi.
Re: OpenAI threatens to revoke o1 access for asking it about its chain of thought
#316[dead]
Re: OpenAI threatens to revoke o1 access for asking it about its chain of thought
#317Earlier quoted context omitted.
> 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. IMO that has already peaked. GPT4 original certainly was terminally corny, but competitors like Claude/Llama aren't as bad, and neither is 4o. Some of the bad writing does from things they can't/don't want to solve - "har…
I just wanted to thank you for the medium article you posted. I was online when Paul made that bizarre “delve” tweet but never knew so much about Nigeria and its English. As someone from a former British colony too I understood why using such a word was perfectly normal but wasn’t aware Kenyans and Nigerians trained ChatGPT.
It wasn't bizarre, it was ignorant if not borderline racist. He is telling native English speakers from non-anglosaxon countries that their English isn't normal
Re: OpenAI threatens to revoke o1 access for asking it about its chain of thought
#318Earlier quoted context omitted.
I just wanted to thank you for the medium article you posted. I was online when Paul made that bizarre “delve” tweet but never knew so much about Nigeria and its English. As someone from a former British colony too I understood why using such a word was perfectly normal but wasn’t aware Kenyans and Nigerians trained ChatGPT.
It wasn't bizarre, it was ignorant if not borderline racist. He is telling native English speakers from non-anglosaxon countries that their English isn't normal
It's not normal, that's why its interesting.
A few things on that article, though:
1: If non-native english speakers were training ChatGPT, then of course non-native English essays would be flagged as AI generated! It's not their fault, its ours for thinking that exploited labor with a slick facade was magical machine intelligence.
2: These tools are widely used in the developing world since fluent english is a sign of education and class and opens doors for you socially and economically; why would Nigerians use such ornate english if it didn't come from a competition to show who can speak the language of the colonizer best?
3: It's undeniable that the ones responding to Paul Graham completely missed the point. Regardless of who uses what words when, the vast majority of papers, until ChatGPT was released, did not use the word "delve," and the incidence of that word in papers increased 10-fold after. Yes, its possible that the author used "delve" intentionally, but its statistically unlikely (especially since ChatGPT used "delve" in most of its responses). A small group of English speakers, who don't predominantly interact with VCs in Silicon Valley, do not make a difference in this judgement--even if there are a lot of Englishes, the only English that most people in the business world deal with is American, European, and South Asian. Compared to the English speakers of those regions, Nigeria is a small fraction.
If Paul Graham was dealing predominantly with Nigerians in his work, he probably would not have made that tweet in the first place.
Re: OpenAI threatens to revoke o1 access for asking it about its chain of thought
#319Earlier quoted context omitted.
>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…
> 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. IMO that has already peaked. GPT4 original certainly was terminally corny, but competitors like Claude/Llama aren't as bad, and neither is 4o. Some of the bad writing does from things they can't/don't want to solve - "har…
Italians would say enormous since it's directly coming from latin.
In general all the people whose main language is a latin language are very likely to use those "difficult" words, because to them they are "completely normal" words.
Re: OpenAI threatens to revoke o1 access for asking it about its chain of thought
#320Okay 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…
I think that there is some supporting machinery that uses symbolic computation to guide neural model. That is why chain of thought cannot be restored in full.
Given that LLMs use beam search (at the very least, top-k) and even context-free/context-sensitive grammar compliance (for JSON and SQL, at the very least) it is more than probable.
Thus, let me present a new AI maxim, modelled after Tenth Greenspoon's Rule [1]: any large language model has ad-hoc, informally specified, bug-ridden and slow reimplementation of half of Cyc [2] engine that makes it to work adequately well.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenspun%27s_tenth_rule
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyc