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

Stanford Alpaca web demo suspended “until further notice”

alpaca-ai-custom4.ngrok.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 83 posts

Re: Stanford Alpaca web demo suspended “until further notice”

#61

Post by 3np »

russellbeattie wrote: post #4
meghan_rain wrote: post #3

Ok wow this is big news, did Facebook or OpenAI threaten them with a lawsuit?

Given that Alpaca violated the TOS of both services, this is not surprising. It could also have been Stanford’s legal office trying to preempt a lawsuit, or a “friendly” email from one of the companies expressing displeasure and pointing out Stanford’s liability. So more of a veiled threat rather than an official one. Either way, the toothpaste is out of the tube. We now know that a model’s training can essentially b…

> Given that Alpaca violated the TOS of both services, this is not surprising.

I don't think so? They are not competing.

Re: Stanford Alpaca web demo suspended “until further notice”

#62

Post by true_religion »

sebzim4500 wrote: post #50
chris_va wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm just curious, what do you think should happen here? Imagine you are hosting a demo for fun, and people do some nefarious (by your own estimation) things with it. So, rationally, you decide to not allow that sort of thing anymore. You don't really owe people an explanation, it's a free country and all, but it's nice to avoid getting bombarded with questions. Now what do you write up? Spend hours writing an essay o…

That's fine, just don't pretend that running the language model was 'unsafe'.

Personally speaking, I would pretend what ever I had to in order to get back to work that I find interesting.

I don’t think they owe a moral stand to anyone.

Re: Stanford Alpaca web demo suspended “until further notice”

#63

Post by adt »

3np wrote: post #61
russellbeattie wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Given that Alpaca violated the TOS of both services, this is not surprising. It could also have been Stanford’s legal office trying to preempt a lawsuit, or a “friendly” email from one of the companies expressing displeasure and pointing out Stanford’s liability. So more of a veiled threat rather than an official one. Either way, the toothpaste is out of the tube. We now know that a model’s training can essentially b…

> Given that Alpaca violated the TOS of both services, this is not surprising. I don't think so? They are not competing.

OpenAI Terms of Use (14/Mar/2023)

2. Usage Requirements

c. Restrictions

You may not

(iii) use output from the Services to develop models that compete with OpenAI;

https://openai.com/policies/terms-of-use

Re: Stanford Alpaca web demo suspended “until further notice”

#64

Post by 3np »

adt wrote: post #63
3np wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Given that Alpaca violated the TOS of both services, this is not surprising. I don't think so? They are not competing.

OpenAI Terms of Use (14/Mar/2023) 2. Usage Requirements c. Restrictions You may not (iii) use output from the Services to develop models that compete with OpenAI; https://openai.com/policies/terms-of-use

Alpaca explicitly disallows commercial use, making it a non-competitor.

Re: Stanford Alpaca web demo suspended “until further notice”

#65

Post by LoganDark »

SpaceManNabs wrote: post #48
andrewmcwatters wrote: post #18

I think it's only a matter of time until one of these models gets into the hands of a hacker who wants unfettered ability to interact with a LLM without moral concerns. I think there's tremendous value in end user facing LLMs being trained against moral policies, but for internal or private usage, if these models are trained on essentially raw WWW sourced data, I would personally want raw output. I'm also finding it…

Oh wow, I finally see a HN comment, with a positive opinion on more AI ethics, that is not grayed out.

It's very easy to give into FUD when it comes to AI because of how much of a wildcard it is. I see no evidence of that in GP which is indeed pretty rare.

Re: Stanford Alpaca web demo suspended “until further notice”

#66

Post by [deleted] »

nico wrote: post #26
andrewmcwatters wrote: post #18

I think it's only a matter of time until one of these models gets into the hands of a hacker who wants unfettered ability to interact with a LLM without moral concerns. I think there's tremendous value in end user facing LLMs being trained against moral policies, but for internal or private usage, if these models are trained on essentially raw WWW sourced data, I would personally want raw output. I'm also finding it…

> into the hands of a hacker Forget “hackers”, think government agencies. Which is probably already happening right now. Food for thought: What’s the intersection of people closely related to OpenAI and Palantir? Edit: related thread on another front page post - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35201992

[deleted]

Re: Stanford Alpaca web demo suspended “until further notice”

#67

Post by miketery »

eh9 wrote: post #58
2bitencryption wrote: post #17

Is this an indication that the biggest impact from LLMs will be on the edge? It's almost a certainty that a model as good (or better) than Alpaca's fine-tuned LLaMA 7B will be made public within the next or two. And it's been shown that a model of that size can run on a Raspberry Pi with decent performance and accuracy. With all that being the case, you could either use a service (with restrictions, censorship, etc)…

I just saw a project that lets you input an entire repo into GPT. Coincidentally, my place of employment just told us not to input any proprietary code into any generator with a retention policy. Even then, I feel like the play will be an enterprise service instead of licensing.

Link?

Re: Stanford Alpaca web demo suspended “until further notice”

#68

Post by chii »

aaomidi wrote: post #59
ars wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And if the LLM scales infinitely it still does nothing unless a human reads and acts on it. And as you said: Humans don't scale, and have agency. Just writing something bad doesn't actually mean something bad happened. These days it seems like people are oversensitive to how things are said to them, and what things are said to them.

Wow. You just found the solution to propaganda! People just shouldn’t be sensitive!

You jest, but the idea of critical thinking and rationalism is what you'd use to combat propaganda.

Re: Stanford Alpaca web demo suspended “until further notice”

#69

Post by chii »

cloudking wrote: post #39
gtoubassi wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://github.com/antimatter15/alpaca.cpp has links

Interesting issue in that repo.. https://github.com/antimatter15/alpaca.cpp/issues/23

and i too, can write a fictional story of how i am evil.

I think people are reading too much intentions into the output.

Re: Stanford Alpaca web demo suspended “until further notice”

#70

Post by inawarminister »

sebzim4500 wrote: post #41
andrewmcwatters wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was under the impression that LLaMA was also trained against a series of moral policies, but perhaps I'm mistaken. It seems Meta chose their words carefully to imply that LLaMA does in fact, not have moral training: > There is still more research that needs to be done to address the risks of bias, toxic comments, and hallucinations in large language models. Like other models, LLaMA shares these challenges. As a fou…

If they tried to make LLaMA woke, they did a terrible job. If you prompt it right you can basically get it to write Mein Kampf.

Yes that's because LLaMA is unfiltered, which is very good for general usage.
Post reply on HN