Looks like the only way to identify a genius human vs GPT-4 is to use leetcode hard problems.
GPT-4
171–180 of 1001 posts
Re: GPT-4
#172Since it’s trained on a specialized supercomputer I doubt we’ll be seeing an open source or non-OpenAI version of this for the next couple years at least. Sad to say it but OpenAI has successfully privatized AI
I'm not sure what "open source" even means in the context of trained ML model. No one's going to be downloading this to their Macbook even if OpenAI would let you.
As for "non-OpenAI version", I'm not sure that it's OpenAI's fault that Google has missed a few steps here. It really SHOULD be them leading this field, if they weren't so fat and lazy. OpenAI is a 7-year old startup with just over a few hundred employees. This stuff is RIGHT THERE to be claimed by any players with access to funding and an ability to get out of their own way.
Re: GPT-4
#173This technology has been a true blessing to me. I have always wished to have a personal PhD in a particular subject whom I could ask endless questions until I grasped the topic. Thanks to recent advancements, I feel like I have my very own personal PhDs in multiple subjects, whom I can bombard with questions all day long. Although I acknowledge that the technology may occasionally produce inaccurate information, the…
You can't do that yet due to factuality issues, but that's the goal... the future of learning will radically change
I'm fantastically excited about how it will help people who learn differently than the standard academic model.
Re: GPT-4
#174Access is invite only for the API, and rate limited for paid GPT+. > gpt-4 has a context length of 8,192 tokens. We are also providing limited access to our 32,768–context (about 50 pages of text) version, gpt-4-32k, which will also be updated automatically over time (current version gpt-4-32k-0314, also supported until June 14). Pricing is $0.06 per 1K prompt tokens and $0.12 per 1k completion tokens. The context le…
Also note that image input isn't available to the public yet.
>Image inputs are still a research preview and not publicly available.
Re: GPT-4
#175The naming of these products is starting to confuse me. AFAIK, ChatGPT is ultimately a fine-tune of the base davinci model, which everyone should have had access to for a while now. "GPT-4" sounds to me like some linear increase over davinci's prior capabilities, not some amazing technological step function.
I am curious - for those of you who are banging your head against the 4k token limit in ChatGPT: Why don't you grab the base davinci model and train it on your exact business so you don't have to prompt the context every time? Have we tried this and found it to be too difficult/expensive, or is there lacking guidance on the best way to go about it?
I don't think including the entire business domain into chat context every time is a good long-term solution.
Re: GPT-4
#176Is there law in U.S. that made OpenAI implement this in their TOS ? (i) Export Controls. The Services may not be used in or for the benefit of, exported, or re-exported (a) into any U.S. embargoed countries (collectively, the “Embargoed Countries”) or (b) to anyone on the U.S. Treasury Department’s list of Specially Designated Nationals, any other restricted party lists (existing now or in the future) identified by t…
Perhaps they just asked GPT to generate some TOS for them, and that sort of thing is kinda expected...
Re: GPT-4
#177Is there anything we could do to have them stop calling themselves OpenAI ? They are so far from open at this point. In Germany at least, you're not allowed to have a misleading name for your company
Out of curiosity, what do you want Open to mean?
Re: GPT-4
#178This is huge: "Rather than the classic ChatGPT personality with a fixed verbosity, tone, and style, developers (and soon ChatGPT users) can now prescribe their AI’s style and task by describing those directions in the 'system' message."
Anyone know how "system" works? Is it merely a prefix on the prompt?
Re: GPT-4
#179This technology has been a true blessing to me. I have always wished to have a personal PhD in a particular subject whom I could ask endless questions until I grasped the topic. Thanks to recent advancements, I feel like I have my very own personal PhDs in multiple subjects, whom I can bombard with questions all day long. Although I acknowledge that the technology may occasionally produce inaccurate information, the…
My experience has been that the answers are very convincing, but not necessarily true. I would be careful asking gpt questions about abstract knowledge, less about linguistic structure.
That's exactly it. The bot espouses facts with the same tone of confidence regardless of whether they're true or entirely fictional.
I understand it has no sense of knowledge-of-knowledge, so (apparently) no ability to determine how confident it ought to be about what it's saying — it never qualifies with "I'm not entirely sure about this, but..."
I think this is something that needs to be worked in ASAP. It's a fundamental aspect of how people actually interact. Establishing oneself as factually reliable is fundamental for communication and social cohesion, so we're constantly hedging what we say in various ways to signify our confidence in its truthfulness. The absence of those qualifiers in otherwise human-seeming and authoritative-sounding communication is a recipe for trouble.
Re: GPT-4
#180I think it's interesting that they've benchmarked it against an array of standardized tests. Seems like LLMs would be particularly well suited to this kind of test by virtue of it being simple prompt:response, but I have to say...those results are terrifying. Especially when considering the rate of improvement. bottom 10% to top 10% of LSAT in What are the implications for society when general thinking, reading, and…
It'd be terrifying if everything has an "accuracy score". It'll be a convergence to human intelligence rather than an advancement :/