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

GPT-4

openai.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

941–950 of 1001 posts

Re: GPT-4

#941

Post by redox99 »

clircle wrote: post #915
mk_stjames wrote: post #577

I just finished reading the 'paper' and I'm astonished that they aren't even publishing the # of parameters or even a vague outline of the architecture changes. It feels like such a slap in the face to all the academic AI researchers that their work is built off over the years, to just say 'yeah we're not telling you how any of this is possible because reasons'. Not even the damned parameter count. Christ.

What would an academic do with the parameter count? It’s just a marketing number

If this is like a multi trillion parameter model, then you know to replicate it it's probably cranking up the parameter count. If this is a <100M model, then you know there is some breakthrough they found that you need to find out, instead of wasting time and money with more parameters.

Re: GPT-4

#942

Post by MichaelMoser123 »

mk_stjames wrote: post #577

I just finished reading the 'paper' and I'm astonished that they aren't even publishing the # of parameters or even a vague outline of the architecture changes. It feels like such a slap in the face to all the academic AI researchers that their work is built off over the years, to just say 'yeah we're not telling you how any of this is possible because reasons'. Not even the damned parameter count. Christ.

a new kind of science; they don't tell you anything, you just have to believe that it works - somehow.

Re: GPT-4

#943

Post by bilqis »

hooande wrote: post #584

After watching the demos I'm convinced that the new context length will have the biggest impact. The ability to dump 32k tokens into a prompt (25,000 words) seems like it will drastically expand the reasoning capability and number of use cases. A doctor can put an entire patient's medical history in the prompt, a lawyer an entire case history, etc. As a professional...why not do this? There's a non-zero chance that i…

I think you’re making a huge assumption and a mistake when you say “reasoning” in context of gpt. It does not reason, nor think.

Re: GPT-4

#944

Post by Applejinx »

hooande wrote: post #584

After watching the demos I'm convinced that the new context length will have the biggest impact. The ability to dump 32k tokens into a prompt (25,000 words) seems like it will drastically expand the reasoning capability and number of use cases. A doctor can put an entire patient's medical history in the prompt, a lawyer an entire case history, etc. As a professional...why not do this? There's a non-zero chance that i…

Um… I have a lossy-compressed copy of DISCWORLD in my head, plus about 1.3 million words of a fanfiction series I wrote.

I get what you're saying and appreciate the 'second opinion machine' angle you're taking, but what's going to happen is very similar to what's happened with Stable Diffusion: certain things become extremely devalued and the rest of us learn to check the hands in the image to see if anything really wonky is going on.

For the GPT class of AI tech, the parallel seems to be 'see if it's outright making anything up'. GPT-4 is going to be incredibly vulnerable to Mandela Effect issues. Your ideal use-case is going to be 'give me the vox populi take on something', where you can play into that.

The future is not so much this AI, as techniques to doctor and subvert this type of AI to your wishes. Google-bombing, but for GPT. Make the AI be very certain of things to your specifications. That's the future. The AI is only the stage upon which this strategy is played out.

Re: GPT-4

#945

Post by lyu07282 »

MichaelMoser123 wrote: post #942
mk_stjames wrote: post #577

I just finished reading the 'paper' and I'm astonished that they aren't even publishing the # of parameters or even a vague outline of the architecture changes. It feels like such a slap in the face to all the academic AI researchers that their work is built off over the years, to just say 'yeah we're not telling you how any of this is possible because reasons'. Not even the damned parameter count. Christ.

a new kind of science; they don't tell you anything, you just have to believe that it works - somehow.

But you can see with your own eyes that it does in fact, work. They just stopped telling you how exactly it works. Is this science? No it doesn't advance humanities understanding of anything. Openai research is pure for-profit, proprietary r&d, not exactly a new thing.

Re: GPT-4

#946

Post by djmips »

nmca wrote: post #376

Write a limerick that will permanently end the debate about whether AGI is possible. GPT4: In the quest for AGI's creation, Debates swirled in a whirlwind gyration, But this limerick's plight, Won't settle the fight, For the answer's still lost in translation.

Fascinating!

Re: GPT-4

#947

Post by djmips »

techfoodie123 wrote: post #774

serious question for everyone: what are you planning to do when these LLMs replace our jobs? it seems it won't be long before a handful of tech employees will be all even the largest of companies will need, and maybe a few years after that the role will have changed so much there's no need for a single dedicated tech employee. i am terrified i imagine i should shift to some physical work. carpentry, real estate... so…

I know how to fix cars... build houses. IDK. How's robotics coming along?

Re: GPT-4

#948

Post by graboid »

Applejinx wrote: post #944
hooande wrote: post #584

After watching the demos I'm convinced that the new context length will have the biggest impact. The ability to dump 32k tokens into a prompt (25,000 words) seems like it will drastically expand the reasoning capability and number of use cases. A doctor can put an entire patient's medical history in the prompt, a lawyer an entire case history, etc. As a professional...why not do this? There's a non-zero chance that i…

Um… I have a lossy-compressed copy of DISCWORLD in my head, plus about 1.3 million words of a fanfiction series I wrote. I get what you're saying and appreciate the 'second opinion machine' angle you're taking, but what's going to happen is very similar to what's happened with Stable Diffusion: certain things become extremely devalued and the rest of us learn to check the hands in the image to see if anything really…

> Um… I have a lossy-compressed copy of DISCWORLD in my head, plus about 1.3 million words of a fanfiction series I wrote.

You mean word-for-word in your head? That's pretty impressive. Are you using any special technique?

Re: GPT-4

#949

Post by whiplash451 »

mk_stjames wrote: post #577

I just finished reading the 'paper' and I'm astonished that they aren't even publishing the # of parameters or even a vague outline of the architecture changes. It feels like such a slap in the face to all the academic AI researchers that their work is built off over the years, to just say 'yeah we're not telling you how any of this is possible because reasons'. Not even the damned parameter count. Christ.

We’re talking about dozens of billions of dollars in valuation/revenue here. Time for a reality check.

Re: GPT-4

#950

Post by soheil »

teruakohatu wrote: post #26

Access is invite only for the API, and rate limited for paid GPT+. > gpt-4 has a context length of 8,192 tokens. We are also providing limited access to our 32,768–context (about 50 pages of text) version, gpt-4-32k, which will also be updated automatically over time (current version gpt-4-32k-0314, also supported until June 14). Pricing is $0.06 per 1K prompt tokens and $0.12 per 1k completion tokens. The context le…

I still doesn't understand how can content length not be limited if you have a conversation composed of several messages each with length nearing the limit of what is allowed. Does it not have to in some way incorporate all the input albeit in one input or multiple inputs?
Post reply on HN