51–60 of 120 posts
Perhaps AI generated text should be created with a specific signature in mind _specifically_ to be identifiable?
I saw this[1] interview with Sam Altman touching on interim AI impact. I really agree with his point that basically detecting output from LLMs is basically going to be futile and only really relevant in the near term. Accuracy is obviously going to improve in models and detection isnt that difficult now but will be in the future, especially if output is modified or an attempt to obfuscate origin is made. [1] https://…
>detection isnt that difficult now I would have thought this, but every attempt I've seen at detecting chatGPT generated text has failed miserably.
Also false positives are typically "this text is likely to contain parts that were AI generated" rather than "This text is higly likely to be AI generated" (which is what GPT-generated content generally produces).
When I've tried to prompt-engineer GPT to produce text that GPTZero will flag as negative it has been pretty tough!
Just wrote this myself, although I did try to chatGPT-style it a bit. I thought the final third would serve to identify it as non-AI as it goes off on a tangent about isotopes... > "The periodic table is a systematic ordering of elements by certain charcteristics including: the number of protons they contain, the number of electrons they usually have in their outer shells, and the nature of their partially-filled out…
Just wrote this myself, although I did try to chatGPT-style it a bit. I thought the final third would serve to identify it as non-AI as it goes off on a tangent about isotopes... > "The periodic table is a systematic ordering of elements by certain charcteristics including: the number of protons they contain, the number of electrons they usually have in their outer shells, and the nature of their partially-filled out…
The colon in line 1 is clunky, the combination of "but" and "with" in line 2 reads as passive, and line 3 is full person.
As millions of people interact with ChatGPT, their writing will subtly, gradually, begin to mimic its style. As future versions of the model are trained on this new text, both human and AI styles will converge until any difference between the two are infinitesimal.
One of the big complaints with LLMs is the confident hallucination of incorrect facts, like software APIs that don’t exist. But the way I see it, if ChatGPT thinks the Python list object should have a .is_sorted() property, that’s a pretty good indication that maybe it should. I work in PM (giant company, not Python), and one of these days my self-control will fail me and I will open a bug for “product does not suppo…
Hahaha, Python language fixing itself!!!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
One of the big complaints with LLMs is the confident hallucination of incorrect facts, like software APIs that don’t exist. But the way I see it, if ChatGPT thinks the Python list object should have a .is_sorted() property, that’s a pretty good indication that maybe it should. I work in PM (giant company, not Python), and one of these days my self-control will fail me and I will open a bug for “product does not suppo…
> it, if ChatGPT thinks the Python list object should have a .is_sorted() property, that’s a pretty good indication that maybe it should. Yes! And when it hallucinates references for articles, often times those articles probably should exist…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Prediction #1: Once enough ChatGPT output gets posted online, it will inevitably find its way into the training corpus. When that happens, ChatGPT becomes stateful and develops episodic memory. Prediction #2: As more people discuss ChatGPT online, by late 2023 discussion of Roko's Basilisk exceeds discussion of ChatGPT. (half /s)
Or. ChatGPT will overtrain on it's own data and go to shit the way google search did
As millions of people interact with ChatGPT, their writing will subtly, gradually, begin to mimic its style. As future versions of the model are trained on this new text, both human and AI styles will converge until any difference between the two are infinitesimal.
Sounds accurate and horrifying, I don't get the enthusiasm for this at all beyond a desire to be there first and make a ton of money. All manuscripts get a run through an AI editor, all business writing is even more soullessly devoid of purpose beyond accomplishing task X, all blogposts are finetuned for maximum engagement and therefore ad/referral revenue. That's already happening I know but it will be amplified to…
[1] - https://github.com/openai/gpt-2-output-dataset/blob/master/d...
I saw this[1] interview with Sam Altman touching on interim AI impact. I really agree with his point that basically detecting output from LLMs is basically going to be futile and only really relevant in the near term. Accuracy is obviously going to improve in models and detection isnt that difficult now but will be in the future, especially if output is modified or an attempt to obfuscate origin is made. [1] https://…
> Accuracy is obviously going to improve in models Well, to be clear, they can put rules based filters and other things on top of the neural net, but the core GPT will never get more accurate since it has no mechanism to understand what words mean.
Our models sizes are a product of our scaling and hardware limitations. There's no reason to believe we are anywhere near optimal.