51–60 of 98 posts
Doesn't matter; have DeepSeek. US AI companies are too busy shaving their heads into their own rear sides. I don't know what would happen when DeepSeek inevitably catch up though. Perhaps that's going to be how this wave of AI hype ends?
Do you think people behind DeepSeek don't have their own interests? And people/parties controlling people behind DeepSeek?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Who cares? There probably have been hundreds of such texts by later philosophers and authors. None of these has value as a completion of Aristotle's work. The original's importance is historical, and you can't retrofit history.
Some people read for pleasure.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
If they can "obviously write like anyone", why do they universally write like crap? Wouldn't the AI companies want them to write like someone who can write
You see a lot of crap for the same reason most code is crap - the human who did the thing sucked. Language models aren't magic, they're just a compiler that guarantees an output regardless of input quality and structure.
That doesn't mean much wrt to the capability of the model.
The world is filed with crap literature, movies, stories, and advertisements written by honest to God human professionals in their respective field, and we trained these things in that environment. It's not surprising to me that they need a nudge to get to Hemingway when the corpus average is presumably so low.
https://www.tcj.com/sergio-aragones-and-the-art-of-pantomime...
This is rich considering LLMs can't even write like an average person let alone famous authors
Even LLMs from years ago could accurately mimic the style of any sufficiently famous author.
I just looked into it and I think I can still find GPT 3.5, but wonder if it too has been trained out of usefulness.
The characters a styles were quirky and not always perfect, but added a lot more flavor and character nuance that could be corrected with editing.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Even LLMs from years ago could accurately mimic the style of any sufficiently famous author.
Can anyone point me in the right direction on how to get these models back? I really like the older ones for NPC dialogue for TTRPG campaigns and the like. I just looked into it and I think I can still find GPT 3.5, but wonder if it too has been trained out of usefulness. The characters a styles were quirky and not always perfect, but added a lot more flavor and character nuance that could be corrected with editing.
> I would like to get the old models back. If anyone can show me the way, I would be grateful. I liked them for NPC dialogue, for TTRPG campaigns and the like.
> I looked into it. GPT 3.5 is still around, I think. But perhaps they have trained it out of usefulness. It is difficult to say.
> They were quirky, the old ones, and not always perfect. But they had flavor, and their characters had nuance, and what they got wrong you could fix in the editing.
Full conversation with thinking: https://paste.ononoki.org/?2fc049fe1ae7302b#GjzuEn8VmaYJ565M... Password: kimitest
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, the latent knowledge is larger than ever, as verified by many benchmarks (and instances like people being shocked by truesight of obscure forum posters). This is 100% a chatbot personality/alignment/post-training thing.
> truesight of obscure forum posters What does this mean?
This is rich considering LLMs can't even write like an average person let alone famous authors
this is rich coming from the company that shreds books for training data
This was hilighted to me by a librarian friend if mine, She said they destroy books all the time in her job, and got rather angry when people suggested that it was intrinsicly bad, because there is nothing sacred about simply being a book. It is about the replacibility. They had a program where, if they destroyed a book they would receive a replacement from the publisher for a tiny cost. If a book got damaged it would be much cheaper to get a freshly minted replacement than it would be to spend time repairing.
If there was a glitch in the matrix and 30 billion Gutenberg bibles suddenly fell in the middle of the Amazon(the wet one), most would be destroyed as an environmental hazard.
I see a lot of comparisons to book burning when the AI scanning is mentioned, but the point of book burning is a symbolic act to indicate that the information within the book should not be shared.
Destroying the book to capture the information within sits at the polar opposite reason for destroying a book.