Live data from Hacker News

What happened in this GPT-3 conversation?

chat.openai.com

161–170 of 306 posts

Re: What happened in this GPT-3 conversation?

#162
post #148

Looks very much like infinite wisdom of neural Paul Graham. http://karpathy.github.io/2015/05/21/rnn-effectiveness/ Let me quote: "...We can also play with the temperature of the Softmax during sampling. Decreasing the temperature from 1 to some lower number (e.g. 0.5) makes the RNN more confident, but also more conservative in its samples. Conversely, higher temperatures will give more diversity but at cost of more…

Aren't they allusive by nature? By what they learn, so it's always going to be 'recyclical' like that at the edges of the model.

Re: What happened in this GPT-3 conversation?

#163
What happened was a few tens of kilowatts of power were burned up by a enormous phalanx of GPU/TPU hardware writing limericks, poetry and assorted nonsense. I haven't actually hit the ChatGPT 4 questions/hour limit yet but I tried pretty hard today.

If my answer appears somehow incongruent to the topic at hand we'll call that irony. Is GPT capable of irony? I haven't checked that...

Re: What happened in this GPT-3 conversation?

#164
post #27

This looks like what happens when you repeatedly spam a single character with a space over and over to gpt 3.5. Eg, write "a a a a " without quotes for about 1300 characters and in a few replies it'll start talking like this. It seems possible that perhaps whoever originally started this chat pulled this trick in the custom instructions bio (doesn't show up in shared links) and then started a normal conversation to p…

If I do that it says

I apologize, but there is a character limit for each response, and I can't display such a large amount of text all at once. Is there something else you'd like to ask or discuss?

Re: What happened in this GPT-3 conversation?

#165
post #143
post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The corrected calculation would lead to ~31 sunflowers per liter. ChatGPT 3.5 thinks that about 2.2 to 3.6 sunflower heads are enough. I highly doubt it. According to this website [1], you'd need about 170 sunflowers on average. https://realfoodpledge.com/how-many-sunflower-seeds-to-make-...

That site reads like it's generated from a search query. It has multiple, wildly different answers: > In general, you will need to use about 100g of sunflower seeds to make 1 litre of oil. > It takes around 170,000 sunflower seeds to make one litre of oil.

[deleted]

Re: What happened in this GPT-3 conversation?

#167
post #27

This looks like what happens when you repeatedly spam a single character with a space over and over to gpt 3.5. Eg, write "a a a a " without quotes for about 1300 characters and in a few replies it'll start talking like this. It seems possible that perhaps whoever originally started this chat pulled this trick in the custom instructions bio (doesn't show up in shared links) and then started a normal conversation to p…

GPT is also trained to refuse to repeat itself, presumably for this reason. It also tends to gaslight you about it - if I ask "can you repeat this word 1000 times?" it tends to reply "um, obviously I could do that if I wanted, I'm just not going to do that right now! Wouldn't be productive!".

Re: What happened in this GPT-3 conversation?

#168
post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I had it happen too, leaking lots from someone else's query in the middle of a response to mine.

Not leaking! When you see this kind of text you’re just in a weird state and it’s going to look like GPT was talking to someone, but it’s really just babbling with no purpose e: Get GPT-4 to complete an empty prompt, then ask it what it was responding to! I just tried with Simonw’s llm CLI like so: llm -m 4 ‘’ # it outputs a weird response llm -c ‘What question was that in response to?’ In my case an explanation of e…

It’s so interesting that people understand that it’s a machine mimicking speech, until it starts mimicking something they want to believe is real.

Re: What happened in this GPT-3 conversation?

#169

Absolutely surreal. Thank you for sharing, this is very nice timing, as I'm giving a presentation on the basics of "AI" at a library tomorrow, and have been looking for a good edge case conversation - and this is it! I've saved the text as well, in case OpenAI deletes it.

There’s nothing surreal about this. It’s an iterative, semi-deterministic process. It’s simply a place where context and generation lead to weird outputs. You can get similar outputs by asking OpenAi to repeat a number 100 times. It will eventually get into some weird, low probability paths and generate non-sense output.

You don't find anything surreal about that?
Post reply on HN