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

OpenAI's plans according to sama

humanloop.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 269 posts

Re: OpenAI's plans according to sama

#131

Post by cwkoss »

tivert wrote: post #47
cwkoss wrote: post #17

I love the tongue-in-cheek paradox myth that the Bitcoin whitepaper was written by a future god-AI to increase demand for GPUs (and thus boost supply) so we are able to assemble the future god-AI.

> I love the tongue-in-cheek paradox myth that the Bitcoin whitepaper was written by a future god-AI to increase demand for GPUs (and thus boost supply) so we are able to assemble the future god-AI. I know it's a joke, but the hole is the god-AI couldn't have been that smart, since cryptocurrency-mining quickly switched to ASICs, which muting the demand increase for GPUs.

I think there are some derivative coins that extended the viability of GPU mining, but I've been out of the game for a decade.

Re: OpenAI's plans according to sama

#132

Post by TapWaterBandit »

sharkjacobs wrote: post #24

> He reiterated his belief in the importance of open source and said that OpenAI was considering open-sourcing GPT-3. Part of the reason they hadn’t open-sourced yet was that he was skeptical of how many individuals and companies would have the capability to host and serve large LLMs. Am I reading this right? "We're not open sourcing GPT-3 because we don't think it would be useful to anyone else"

When you stop listening to what Sam Altman says and just focus on what he does, you can see the guy is a bit of a snake. Greedy power-hungry man imho.

Re: OpenAI's plans according to sama

#133

Post by hoschicz »

- they are working on a stateful API - they are working on a cheaper version of GPT-4

Most probably this is driven by their use of it in ChatGPT, which is on fire from PMF. Clearly they're experimenting with the cheaper GPT-4 in ChatGPT right now as it's fairly turbo now, as discussed earlier today.

Re: OpenAI's plans according to sama

#134

Post by carom »

ilaksh wrote: post #93
londons_explore wrote: post #5

> is limited by GPU availability. Which is all the more curious, considering OpenAI said this only in January: > Azure will remain the exclusive cloud provider for all OpenAI workloads across our research, API and products [1] So... OpenAI is severely GPU constrained, it is hampering their ability to execute, onboard customers to existing products and launch products. Yet they signed an agreement not to just go rent…

AWS might not really have much extra GPU capacity for them anyway.. also they would cost more. I think that there aren't a lot of GPUs available and it takes time to add more to the datacenter even when you do get them.

I heard earlier this year that people were having trouble getting allocations on GCP as well. Probably why Nvidia is at $1T now.

Re: OpenAI's plans according to sama

#135

Post by cwkoss »

cwkoss wrote: post #17

I love the tongue-in-cheek paradox myth that the Bitcoin whitepaper was written by a future god-AI to increase demand for GPUs (and thus boost supply) so we are able to assemble the future god-AI.

Fun to imagine a time machine being built but the only thing it can transmit backward in time is PDFs

Re: OpenAI's plans according to sama

#136

Post by twobitshifter »

Left the best part until the end. Scaling models larger is still paying off for openai. It’s not AGI yet, but how much bigger will a model need to get to max out?

>The scaling hypothesis is the idea that we may have most of the pieces in place needed to build AGI and that most of the remaining work will be taking existing methods and scaling them up to larger models and bigger datasets. If the era of scaling was over then we should probably expect AGI to be much further away. The fact the scaling laws continue to hold is strongly suggestive of shorter timelines.

Re: OpenAI's plans according to sama

#137

Post by ftxbro »

refulgentis wrote: post #105
ftxbro wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I had been putting theories in comments but they kept getting flagged or banned or downvoted to oblivion, but maybe its time has come. I'll keep it tame. If you are curious you can google connections of OpenAI board of directors, Will Hurd, In-Q-Tel trustees, Allen and Company, etc. There is more but whatever. The conspiracy theory is that 'the govt stepped in' during the six month pause after gpt-4 was trained and b…

It probably keeps getting flagged because it’s ahistorical, source: OpenAI engineers, and #2 somewhat obviously so. You heard of RLHF?

> You heard of RLHF?

The conspiracy theory isn't that every employee of OpenAI spent 8 hours every day for six months in meetings with govt agencies.

Re: OpenAI's plans according to sama

#138

Post by sheepscreek »

paxys wrote: post #67
sharkjacobs wrote: post #24

> He reiterated his belief in the importance of open source and said that OpenAI was considering open-sourcing GPT-3. Part of the reason they hadn’t open-sourced yet was that he was skeptical of how many individuals and companies would have the capability to host and serve large LLMs. Am I reading this right? "We're not open sourcing GPT-3 because we don't think it would be useful to anyone else"

More like – it won't be useful to small-time developers (since they won't have the capability to host and run it themselves) and so all the benefits will be reaped by AWS and other large players.

This is what I understood as well. They want to either democratize adoption or not release it. The last thing they/anyone wants is for another BigCo or Govt to h take undue advantage of the model (through fine-tuning?) when others cannot.

That said, I can imagine a GPTQ/4-bit quantized model to be smaller and easier to run on somewhat commodity clusters?

Or it could run with GGML/llama.cpp on a cloud instance with a TB of RAM?

After seeing what people were able to do with LLaMA, I am positive that the community will find a way to run it - albeit with some loss in performance.

It would be truly amazing if they used their computing to develop quantized models as well.

Re: OpenAI's plans according to sama

#139

Post by skulk »

barbazoo wrote: post #86
skulk wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm from the future, traveling backwards in time to tell you to not watch Tenet.

Somehow I'm super sensitive to the audio (or might be video) and start feeling nauseous after a short time. Is there an explanation to this? I think it's that scratchy humming background sound.

I don't know, except that I agree that it's horribly mixed. It's almost impossible to make out what people are saying in certain parts, and that causes cognitive load that degrades the experience. Also, the story is completely nonsensical. The only good thing about that movie is that time-reversed fight scene and even that was kind of questionable.

Re: OpenAI's plans according to sama

#140

Post by nonfamous »

thorax wrote: post #127
m3kw9 wrote: post #52

If you look at their API limits, no serious company can use this to scale up beyond say 10k users. 3500 Reqs per min for gpt3.5 turbo. They have a long way to go to make it usable for the rest of the 95%

I've had to move to using Azure OpenAI service during business hours for the API-- much more stable unless the prompts stray into something a little odd and their API censorship blocks the calls.

You can opt out of the safety filtering, btw.
Post reply on HN