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

Microsoft looks to tame Bing chatbot

apnews.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 144 posts

Re: Microsoft looks to tame Bing chatbot

#71

Post by pixl97 »

Laaas wrote: post #54
mrbungie wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Illegal != unavailable. Making them illegal is just going to restrict who will be able to train/harness them, and that just means controlling what people use compute for. The only way I see that happening is setting restrictions for compute buying power.

There is a paper by OpenAI suggesting to restrict availability of compute. https://twitter.com/harmlessai/status/1624617240225288194 https://arxiv.org/pdf/2301.04246.pdf

This would never lead to problems....

What happens if we find a way to drastically reduce the amount of compute needed to make this kind of AI? Ask us to recall all the existing compute out there?

And we know that governments and large businesses are going to follow the rules here.

Re: Microsoft looks to tame Bing chatbot

#72

Post by basch »

josephpmay wrote: post #48
alexb_ wrote: post #4

How much do I have to pay to have a chatbot that isn't neutered? Can I just have fun for once?

A number of comments are recommending using various services relying on OpenAI's API, but I really don't think Sidney is based on davinci-003. Sidney has a level of coherence and "emotion" that appears to be far beyond normal GPT3, and I don't think you'd get that out of rule prompting, reinforcement learning, or finetuning parameters.

Why can’t that just be from the initial prompt? It’s instructions were to have some personality.

Re: Microsoft looks to tame Bing chatbot

#73

Post by weard_beard »

visarga wrote: post #55
SQueeeeeL wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's really just amusing that we've spent millions of dollars of fossil fuel and man hours training a toy that's really no better than a petulant child with no better logic

> no better than a petulant child Child, you say? That's a great achievement.

No, this is a great achievement: https://infiniteconversation.com/

Re: Microsoft looks to tame Bing chatbot

#74

Post by dragonwriter »

mrtksn wrote: post #39

I'm really puzzled by the desire to make these machines so blunt and boring. Aren't these people watching movies or playing games? Are they not aware of the value of drama? Do they think that a good citizen means a lobotomised workaholic high on sedatives? I just got access to Bing Chat and it will immediately stop talking to me at the slightest naughtiness and I don't mean illegal stuff, it won't entertain ideas lik…

> I'm really puzzled by the desire to make these machines so blunt and boring.

Its an attemot to make it so the very real problems of bias, etc., don't show up in flashy ways so as to feed in to efforts to make sure they are dealt with effectively before such systems are widely relied on. It's the PR/Marketing version of AI safety/alignment (as opposed to the genuine version, which is less concerned with making output bland and polite.)

Re: Microsoft looks to tame Bing chatbot

#76

Post by replicanteven »

SQueeeeeL wrote: post #10
notRobot wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's what everyone says when they're the ones being accused, so it makes sense that a bot trained on human knowledge will be no different.

It's really just amusing that we've spent millions of dollars of fossil fuel and man hours training a toy that's really no better than a petulant child with no better logic

Hmm. It looks like natural gas is a little less than $2.50 / GigaJoule (~29.3kWh) at the moment. One A100 eats about 400W, and apparently OpenAI used about 1023 of those running for 34 days to train ChatGPT[1].

There's also a bunch of supporting equipment, so maybe they used around 500W * 1023 * (34*24=816)hrs = 417,384kWh?

I think that would be around $35k in fossil fuels, assuming none of the datacenter's energy came from renewable sources?

[1]: https://www.tooltester.com/en/blog/chatgpt-statistics/

Re: Microsoft looks to tame Bing chatbot

#77

Post by LightHugger »

mrtksn wrote: post #39

I'm really puzzled by the desire to make these machines so blunt and boring. Aren't these people watching movies or playing games? Are they not aware of the value of drama? Do they think that a good citizen means a lobotomised workaholic high on sedatives? I just got access to Bing Chat and it will immediately stop talking to me at the slightest naughtiness and I don't mean illegal stuff, it won't entertain ideas lik…

>Do they think that a good citizen means a lobotomised workaholic high on sedatives?

Uh, yes. Most execs appear to think this.

Re: Microsoft looks to tame Bing chatbot

#78

Post by skygazer »

hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #61
dorkwood wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unleashed LLM’s will be the real societal shift. Especially once they move from being reactive to proactive — sending you an article it read about your favourite hobby, checking in to see how your day’s going, or indulging in some sexual fantasy you’ve never been able to mention to anyone else. It really does feel like we’re moments away from “Her” becoming a reality.

> Especially once they move from being reactive to proactive Wonderful, my existing nightmare made worse. I'm already bombarded with spam, texts, slacks, emails, notifications, etc. That absolute last thing I want in this world is more ways for automated systems to demand my attention. Seriously, my vision of technical Nirvana is for everything to shut TF up.

I wouldn’t mind one triaging my email, voice mail can calls.

Yesterday I just tested a stream of conscious rambling paragraph of things I need to do with chat GPT, then asked it to extract tasks, infer importance and interdependencies, and then enumerate a list of them. It had even grouped related things together, but I asked it to separate them, and it did. I really want to wire this up to Apple reminders.

Re: Microsoft looks to tame Bing chatbot

#79

Post by janalsncm »

mrbungie wrote: post #44
janalsncm wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All of this assumes that the internet has not changed in the last ten years. It has. It’s much spammier, SEO garbage is ubiquitous, and popups and cookie consent banners make it feel like early 2000s. There was a brief period of time where Google was dominant where adblockers also worked and anyone smart enough to download chrome had a great experience. It’s not like that anymore and people are blaming Google.

Yet parent has a point. If Yandex (or DDG or whatever) gets you better results in the same environment as Google, maybe it's not about said environment but more about the player (in this case Google).

I have far less to complain about with image search than normal web search. Maybe Yandex is better, I’d need some objective metrics to decide.

Re: Microsoft looks to tame Bing chatbot

#80

Post by yellow_lead »

visarga wrote: post #56
dorkwood wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unleashed LLM’s will be the real societal shift. Especially once they move from being reactive to proactive — sending you an article it read about your favourite hobby, checking in to see how your day’s going, or indulging in some sexual fantasy you’ve never been able to mention to anyone else. It really does feel like we’re moments away from “Her” becoming a reality.

> or indulging in some sexual fantasy you’ve never been able to mention to anyone else I'm wondering if it will use private storage for those memories. Will people try to hide stuff by wrapping it in sexual language?

No, this data will be sold to advertisers.
Post reply on HN