Has anyone set up a cafe press site that automatically slaps each day's image on a T-shirt?
The most recent one would be good.
GPT Unicorn has drawn a unicorn
191–200 of 207 posts
Re: GPT Unicorn has drawn a unicorn
#192The prompt is Draw a unicorn in SVG format. Dimensions: 500x500. Respond ONLY with a single SVG string. Do not respond with conversation or codeblocks.
https://github.com/adamkdean/gpt-unicorn/blob/master/src/lib...
I just asked this and got the following result:
Re: GPT Unicorn has drawn a unicorn
#193Earlier quoted context omitted.
Go into /r/chatgpt and /r/bing and it's a bit scary how many people anthropomorphize the models.
Honest question, why do you find it scary? I agree that some people take it too far, but most seem to be using metaphor to abstract away the underlying complexities and facilitate conversation. I did the same thing back in college, anthropomorphizing cells and even molecules when I was learning about microbiology and biophysics (e.g., kinesins[1] are a family of postal workers who work hard to deliver packages to the…
> Honest question, why do you find it scary?
What I find scary is how much trust people put into the answers.
Today, I saw someone saying "Look! ChatGPT can design my home solar electrical circuit". That kind of thing will lead to new Darwin awards being given out.
Thing is, if people will trust it to do that right, when will politicians write policy papers with it? Let's face it, they already are. Other people won't want to read those long papers, so they'll ask it to summarise it for them. At that point you have LLMs writing laws and reviewing laws. It's all fine as long as nobody enforces them.
Right?
Re: GPT Unicorn has drawn a unicorn
#194the fact that some of the early ones are anti-smiles, a playful takeaway could be that it saw the insurmountability of the challenge at first!
Re: GPT Unicorn has drawn a unicorn
#195Earlier quoted context omitted.
One important source of non-determinism is from using massive parallelism together with floating point arithmetic. In real math, a sum of numbers has an exact value that doesn't change if you change which order the numbers are added up in, but floating point arithmetic addition is not associative in the same way as real math, and parallelism can cause numbers to be added in a different order from execution to executi…
>and parallelism can cause numbers to be added in a different order from execution to execution Parallelism doesn't magically add non-determinism of this kind unless you intentionally build it to be non deterministic. Nothing prevents you from processing an array in order in parallel.
> Nothing prevents you from processing an array in order in parallel.
100% correct if you remove processing time from the equation.
In reality, Nvidia Cuda calculations run much faster if you let it schedule the order of floating points operations itself. This makes the ordering different from run to run.
This in turn causes the results to be non-deterministic.
Re: GPT Unicorn has drawn a unicorn
#196It has become common knowledge that GPT4 (and also 3.5) have problems with deterministic outputs (even at T=0). So what we're seeing here is just the effect of random sampling, not any actual change to the model itself. If you scroll down, you'll see other close attempts by the exact same model that could already be counted as a win depending on who you ask. Edit: This comment section is a super fascinating case stud…
I have not kept up with GPT architecture, other than noticing that other people have noticed that T=0 is clearly not deterministic for these things (and that that results from a bug, not an intentional feature). This much was obvious when the supposedly genius idiots rolled out GPT-3. It's wonderful to see the whole world bend over and just take it up the ass from a bunch of people who can't figure out why their code…
> people who can't figure out why their code can't produce the same result twice
It is well known that the Nvidia parallel processing optimizations cause non-deterministic results.
It's easy to get deterministic results as far as that goes. They've just elected not to do that, since it would run much slower.
Re: GPT Unicorn has drawn a unicorn
#197The prompt is Draw a unicorn in SVG format. Dimensions: 500x500. Respond ONLY with a single SVG string. Do not respond with conversation or codeblocks. https://github.com/adamkdean/gpt-unicorn/blob/master/src/lib... I just asked this and got the following result: I am not going to fault a language model for not getting that right! This is fundamentally not a language task. It demands an image model.
I would imagine that it would do better if it was told to build it up step by step, and critique its own work as it goes along.
Re: GPT Unicorn has drawn a unicorn
#198Earlier quoted context omitted.
Go into /r/chatgpt and /r/bing and it's a bit scary how many people anthropomorphize the models.
Interesting that modern discourse is to use "scary" and "dangerous" and such words so much more. I wonder if it is related to the present rise in neuroticism and trigger warnings etc. It's not particularly "scary" to me that people do that. I remember Boomer and Scooby Doo bots that people anthropomorphized and those were warbots from barely 10 y ago. I suppose, in today's parlance, "it's scary how much people use fe…
> Interesting that modern discourse is to use "scary" and "dangerous" and such words so much more. I wonder if it is related to the present rise in neuroticism and trigger warnings etc.
I doubt it’s trigger warnings because they usually don’t “warn scary things”.
Also is there any data to back up that scary and fear is used more today than in the past? That seems unlikely.
Re: GPT Unicorn has drawn a unicorn
#199The prompt is Draw a unicorn in SVG format. Dimensions: 500x500. Respond ONLY with a single SVG string. Do not respond with conversation or codeblocks. https://github.com/adamkdean/gpt-unicorn/blob/master/src/lib... I just asked this and got the following result: I am not going to fault a language model for not getting that right! This is fundamentally not a language task. It demands an image model.
I would imagine that it would do better if it was told to build it up step by step, and critique its own work as it goes along.
It would but what I like is how difficult the task is. If the model becomes able (like today) to generate passable results from such a simple prompt, then that shows something, IMO.
Re: GPT Unicorn has drawn a unicorn
#200Earlier quoted context omitted.
Go into /r/chatgpt and /r/bing and it's a bit scary how many people anthropomorphize the models.
Interesting that modern discourse is to use "scary" and "dangerous" and such words so much more. I wonder if it is related to the present rise in neuroticism and trigger warnings etc. It's not particularly "scary" to me that people do that. I remember Boomer and Scooby Doo bots that people anthropomorphized and those were warbots from barely 10 y ago. I suppose, in today's parlance, "it's scary how much people use fe…
> and those were warbots from barely 10 y ago.
Some people even anthropomorphized Eliza. To your point: if you cherry pick enough and survey enough people; “some people” will do just about anything.