91–100 of 696 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This. Despite how impressive the results are, there isn't a particular large moat to prevent competitors from entering the space. Basically just compute $ for training.
they likely do lots of tricks and data collection inside which makes quality better.
OpenAI released a ChatGPT API while reducing the cost by 10x. For those claiming OpenAI is for profit: Why would OpenAI do this if they were fixated on making money? Also, while I wish OpenAI released the code for ChatGPT, I applaud OpenAI for actually making their AI model available, to everyone, right now. * Google hyped their Bard chatbot...but where is it? * Facebook took down Galatica. * Even Bing Chat has a wai…
Reducing costs by 10x may very well increase usage by more than 10x + it makes it even more difficult for competition to come in and undercut them.
Can somebody please clarify. Is the cost $0.002 per 1k tokens generated , read , or both?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I have been saying this since the release of Stable Diffusion that OpenAI is going to struggle as soon as competitors release their models as open source especially when it surpasses GPT-3 and GPT-4. This is why OpenAI is rushing to bring their costs down and to make it close to free, However, Stable Diffusion is leading the race to the bottom and is already at the finish line, since no-one else would release their m…
LLM Legend: OpenAI = closed source not open AI DogeLlamaInuGPT = open source AI
OpenAI released a ChatGPT API while reducing the cost by 10x. For those claiming OpenAI is for profit: Why would OpenAI do this if they were fixated on making money? Also, while I wish OpenAI released the code for ChatGPT, I applaud OpenAI for actually making their AI model available, to everyone, right now. * Google hyped their Bard chatbot...but where is it? * Facebook took down Galatica. * Even Bing Chat has a wai…
To get lock-in from devs before competitors can enter the market and starves any would-be smaller competitors before they can raise money/gain traction.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's just a matter of time before open source models show up with no limits whatsoever.
Hopefully so, would really like to know what else is lost by nerfing potentially offensive responses. Can't imagine a project I'd rather work on. I think open-assistant.io has a chance to do exactly this. We'll see what kind of moves they make in coming months though, wouldn't be surprised if they go the safer route.
Do you find yourself frustrated working with your colleagues, thinking, “you know, I bet if they felt more free to utter racist slurs or endorse illegal activities, we would get a ton more done around here”?
Whisper as an API is great, but having to send the whole payload upfront is a bummer. Most use cases I can build for would want streaming support. Like establish a WebRTC connection and stream audio to OpenAI and get back a live transcription until the audio channel closes.
It's also annoying since there appears to be a hard limit of 25 MiB to the request size, requiring you to split up larger files and manage the "prompt" to subsequent calls. Well, somehow, near as I can tell, how you're expected to use that value isn't documented.
OpenAI released a ChatGPT API while reducing the cost by 10x. For those claiming OpenAI is for profit: Why would OpenAI do this if they were fixated on making money? Also, while I wish OpenAI released the code for ChatGPT, I applaud OpenAI for actually making their AI model available, to everyone, right now. * Google hyped their Bard chatbot...but where is it? * Facebook took down Galatica. * Even Bing Chat has a wai…
Silicon Valley companies have for the past 25 years focused on getting as many users as possible to increase valuation in the hope of getting a $100 billion exit. They don't care about current or near future profitability.
However I agree that OpenAI is getting far too much hate. Their goal of bringing openness to AI made sense in 2015 when one American company (Google) was dominating the field.
However now there are plenty of other companies, countries and open source organizations doing advanced AI research.
Does ChatGPT yet have a debug function to Show Its Work so to speak? I think this will be important in the future when it gets itself into drama, trouble, etc.. Probably also useful to prove how ChatGPT created something rather than being known as an opaque box.
I'm pretty sure any system built via linear regression or similar is an opaque box even to the most experienced researchers. For example: https://clementneo.com/posts/2023/02/11/we-found-an-neuron These are massive functions with billions of parameters that evolved over millions of computing years.
If ChatGPT says it loves me, I not only expect the system to tell me why that was said but what steps brought the system to that conclusion. It is a computer or network of computers after all. Even if the system is continuously learning there should be some facets of reproducible steps that can be enumerated.
ChatGPT: "I love you"
Me: "debug last transaction, Hal."
Here is where I would expect an enumeration of all steps used to reach said conclusion. These steps may evolve/devolve over time as the system ingests new data but it should be possible to have it Think out loud so to speak. Maybe the output is large so ChatGPT should give me a link to a .tar file compressed with whatever it knows is my preferred compression.
[Edit] I accept that this may be hundreds of billions of calculations. I will wait the few minutes it takes to generate a tar file for me. It's good to get up and stretch the legs once in a while.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's also annoying since there appears to be a hard limit of 25 MiB to the request size, requiring you to split up larger files and manage the "prompt" to subsequent calls. Well, somehow, near as I can tell, how you're expected to use that value isn't documented.
You split up the audio and send it over in a loop. Pass in the transcript of the last call as the prompt for the next one. See item 2 here: https://platform.openai.com/docs/guides/speech-to-text/promp...
> we suggest that you avoid breaking the audio up mid-sentence as this may cause some context to be lost.
That's really easy to put in a document, much harder to do in practice. Granted, it might not matter much in the real world, not sure yet.
Still, this will require more hand holding than I'd like.