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

OpenAI Codex

openai.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 181 posts

Re: OpenAI Codex

#31

Post by Miraste »

Vermeulen wrote: post #10

A warning to devs building on OpenAI APIs: We spent months developing a chatbot using GPT3 for our game and released a video showcasing it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nnuSQvoroJo&t=264s Afterwards OpenAI then added GPT3 chatbot guidelines disallowing basically anything like this. We were in communication with them beforehand, but they decided later that any sort of free form chatbot was dangerous. What they allo…

OpenAI cloaks themselves in false "open" terminology to hide how proprietary and incredibly restrictive they've made their tech. That's a very cool demo; have you considered trying to make it run on GPT-J instead? It's an open source alternative you can run yourself or pay an independent api provider without supporting OpenAI.

Re: OpenAI Codex

#32

Post by Vermeulen »

andreyk wrote: post #30
Vermeulen wrote: post #10

A warning to devs building on OpenAI APIs: We spent months developing a chatbot using GPT3 for our game and released a video showcasing it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nnuSQvoroJo&t=264s Afterwards OpenAI then added GPT3 chatbot guidelines disallowing basically anything like this. We were in communication with them beforehand, but they decided later that any sort of free form chatbot was dangerous. What they allo…

Oh man, I was looking forward to this a ton! Are you thinking to keep working on it with the open source GPT J or something similar by any chance?

I am looking at GPTJ, and also hoping OpenAI comes to their senses on how dangerous a video game chatbot can be

Re: OpenAI Codex

#33

Post by motoxpro »

throwaway128327 wrote: post #28
reducesuffering wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Think bigger. Say I'm starting a startup: 1. "Setup Django, Nginx, and Postgres deployed on a Digital Ocean Ubuntu droplet." Done. 2. "Make a shopping page like $URL." Done. 3. "Fill it with data from X and connect with Stripe." Done. 4. ??? 5. Profit Seems like even a great dev will take 20x the time to do that if the model is able to correctly generate this, even with an error, customization, or two.

but does it really matter, if 20x is 1 week instead of 2 hours? are startups really that shallow?

1/20th of the time? That's kind of a big deal.

Re: OpenAI Codex

#34

Post by Vermeulen »

Miraste wrote: post #31
Vermeulen wrote: post #10

A warning to devs building on OpenAI APIs: We spent months developing a chatbot using GPT3 for our game and released a video showcasing it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nnuSQvoroJo&t=264s Afterwards OpenAI then added GPT3 chatbot guidelines disallowing basically anything like this. We were in communication with them beforehand, but they decided later that any sort of free form chatbot was dangerous. What they allo…

OpenAI cloaks themselves in false "open" terminology to hide how proprietary and incredibly restrictive they've made their tech. That's a very cool demo; have you considered trying to make it run on GPT-J instead? It's an open source alternative you can run yourself or pay an independent api provider without supporting OpenAI.

Haven't been able to find a GPT-J service with good latency - though we haven't tried hosting ourselves

Re: OpenAI Codex

#35

Post by EamonnMR »

nradov wrote: post #29
Vermeulen wrote: post #10

A warning to devs building on OpenAI APIs: We spent months developing a chatbot using GPT3 for our game and released a video showcasing it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nnuSQvoroJo&t=264s Afterwards OpenAI then added GPT3 chatbot guidelines disallowing basically anything like this. We were in communication with them beforehand, but they decided later that any sort of free form chatbot was dangerous. What they allo…

The notion of a toy like a chatbot being "dangerous" is just so ludicrous. The OpenAI folks take themselves way too seriously. Their technology is cool and scientifically interesting, but in the end it's nothing more than a clever parlor trick.

Definitely dangerous from a legal perspective if AI Dungeon is any indication.

Re: OpenAI Codex

#36

Post by holler »

reducesuffering wrote: post #23
throwaway128327 wrote: post #19

I don't understand what is going on, why are people even spending time on this? I think this and copilot and etc are solving a non problem of "we will remove the boring part of programming" by generating a bunch of code, so now it's even more boring to read it and check if it actually does what you want. In the same time zero of the developers I interviewed know how a linked list is laid out in memory, or what is the…

Think bigger. Say I'm starting a startup: 1. "Setup Django, Nginx, and Postgres deployed on a Digital Ocean Ubuntu droplet." Done. 2. "Make a shopping page like $URL." Done. 3. "Fill it with data from X and connect with Stripe." Done. 4. ??? 5. Profit Seems like even a great dev will take 20x the time to do that if the model is able to correctly generate this, even with an error, customization, or two.

at the point where 1/2/3 are possible, what value does the startup have when anyone else can ask it to do the same thing?

Re: OpenAI Codex

#37

Post by nradov »

minimaxir wrote: post #25
Vermeulen wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's laggy since it needs to do speech to text, gpt3 text response, then text to speech. Not sure what adds the most latency actually. They only allow gpt3 chatbots if the chatbot is designed to speak only about a specific subject, and literally never says anything bad/negative (and we have to keep logs to make sure this is the case). Which is insane. Their reasoning to me was literally a 'what if' the chatbot "advis…

> But they are so scared of their chatbot saying a bad thing and the PR around that they've removed the possibility of doing anything useful with it. It's not unreasonable to have checks-and-balances on AI content, and there should be. However, in my testing of GPT-3's content filter when it was released (it could be improved now), it was very sensitive to the point that it had tons of false positives. Given that pas…

Why should there be checks and balances on AI content? What most people label as "AI" today is literally just fancy statistics. Should there be checks and balances on the use of linear regression analysis and other statistical techniques? Where do we draw the line?

Re: OpenAI Codex

#38

Post by parksy »

throwaway128327 wrote: post #19

I don't understand what is going on, why are people even spending time on this? I think this and copilot and etc are solving a non problem of "we will remove the boring part of programming" by generating a bunch of code, so now it's even more boring to read it and check if it actually does what you want. In the same time zero of the developers I interviewed know how a linked list is laid out in memory, or what is the…

This is just nascent technology leading toward something like this:

"Computer, I want to play a game."

"Okay, what will the game be?"

"I want to be a starship captain, give me a cool space ship I can explore the galaxy with"

"Okay... like this?"

"Not quite, make the galaxy more realistic, with real stars and planets. Also make it 3d. I want to be the captain inside the ship."

"How about now?"

"Cool, and there should be space stations I can visit near planets, and I can fly my ship to stars with hyperspace. Make it so I have to trade for fuel at the space stations, maybe I need to mine asteroids or search derelict space ships for treasure. I want to play with my friends too, they can have their own ships or walk around my ship."

"Done, was there anything else?"

"Yes, add different alien races to some of the star systems, and make some of them have alliances. I want to talk to the aliens about their history and culture. Sometimes aliens are unfriendly and we'll have space battles if talking doesn't work. Make it so I can command a fleet and call for reinforcements."

"Processing... Done. Anything else?"

"Actually this is boring, can we start over?"

"Game erased. Please provide new prompt."

Re: OpenAI Codex

#39

Post by aeternum »

nradov wrote: post #29
Vermeulen wrote: post #10

A warning to devs building on OpenAI APIs: We spent months developing a chatbot using GPT3 for our game and released a video showcasing it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nnuSQvoroJo&t=264s Afterwards OpenAI then added GPT3 chatbot guidelines disallowing basically anything like this. We were in communication with them beforehand, but they decided later that any sort of free form chatbot was dangerous. What they allo…

The notion of a toy like a chatbot being "dangerous" is just so ludicrous. The OpenAI folks take themselves way too seriously. Their technology is cool and scientifically interesting, but in the end it's nothing more than a clever parlor trick.

It's pretty easy to get GPT-3 to say things that are incredibly sexist and racist. I think OpenAI is more concerned about the bad press associated with that than AI-safety.

Re: OpenAI Codex

#40

Post by throwaway128327 »

motoxpro wrote: post #33
throwaway128327 wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

but does it really matter, if 20x is 1 week instead of 2 hours? are startups really that shallow?

1/20th of the time? That's kind of a big deal.

i think the 1/20th of the time was mentioned was only at start, i dont think you will gain a lot after that as the spaghetti AI will come to collect.

You have a debt to pay. -- Davy Jones

Post reply on HN