6 ms·
Nic Cammarata on Twitter pointed out that if the prompt gives GPT-3 permission to indicate questions are ridiculous, it'll do so reliably: https://twitter.com/
by andyljones 6y ago
Nic Cammarata on Twitter pointed out that if the prompt gives GPT-3 permission to indicate questions are ridiculous, it'll do so reliably:
https://twitter.com/nicklovescode/status/1284050958977130497 https://twitter.com/nicklovescode/status/1284050958977130497
- visarga 6y agoCame here to say this. In the prompt there was no example of rejecting a question for being nonsensical.
- TulliusCicero 6y agoHumans don't need a prompt to do this.
- tech-historian 6y agoTrue. Maybe the human corollary to this is sarcasm. Lots of people fail to pick up on sarcasm in online discussion, hence the /s at the end of a post. And for that matter, natural language parsers really struggle at extracting real meaning from sarcastic texts too.
- lukevp 6y agoChildren often answer questions nonsensically. They are prompted over years to be serious and answer questions correctly.
- riffraff 6y agoI am not sure that's the same. Children answer nonsensically to normal questions, but if you ask a nonsensical question they are more likely to go "uh?" than to answer with logically built follow-up nonsense.
- TulliusCicero 6y agoYes, they are trained over time, just as this model has been.
- dafoex 6y agoWhat would the ethics be of using children in Turing tests? If you asked a human child to answer Turing test questions, would the judges think of them as a computer?
- Sharlin 6y agoHumans have much more context at their perusal than a simple prompt.
- wongarsu 6y agoThat depends on context. Nobody would answer "this question makes no sense" in an exam, instead most people assume they lack knowledge of what's being referenced. Even humans have to expect the possibility of nonsensical questions
- baddox 6y agoHumans don’t need AC power to operate either, but presumably these aren’t the kind of differences we’re interested in.
- SomewhatLikely 6y agoIt depends whether you think the other party would prefer for you to play along or call them out on their BS. Between friends we generally prefer the latter.
- andyljones 6y agoMore generally, the best commentary I've seen on GPT-3 comes from following @gwern and keeping an eye out for whoever else they frequently interact with. https://twitter.com/gwern/with_replies https://twitter.com/gwern/with_replies Most other commentary I've seen either goes too far into reactionary skepticism, too far into to-the-moon style hype, or just straight-up gets stuff wrong by not being aware of some technical detail (importance of prompt design, BPE limits).
- ralfd 6y agoAt least it is witty: Andrej Karpathy @karpathy > By posting GPT generated text we’re polluting the data for its future versions John Carmack @ID_AA_Carmack > Was just about to say that... Old printed books will be the equivalent of the sunken ships they cut up for uncontaminated steel today.
- perl4ever 6y ago>Old printed books will be the equivalent of the sunken ships they cut up for uncontaminated steel today Already are.
- jobigoud 6y agoWhat are modern books contaminated with?
- dejj 6y ago> Old printed books will be the equivalent of the sunken ships they cut up for uncontaminated steel today. It's not so much contamination, but value drift. Did you ever try reading Shakespeare without commentary? So many things of that language are no longer colloquial. Maybe generated text can recover that and train us. Or imagine the "dark tongue" from Paul Kingsnorth' "The Wake" to have been real: we've come quite a bit in expressiveness.
- DonHopkins 6y agoWow, I wonder if it would make a good bullshit detector?
- chrisseaton 6y agoWhat does ‘yo be real’ stand for?
- capableweb 6y ago"be real" for being realistic, asking a better question that is not nonsense. Loosely translated: "yo be real" = "Hey, please be more realistic with your future questions"
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- chrisseaton 6y agoAh sorry I thought it was some technical thing!
- root_axis 6y ago"be real" when spoken by humans means "be yourself" not "be realistic".
- skywhopper 6y agoDepends on the context. But without context I’d read it as “be honest” or “tell the truth” first. So in the context of answering a question it pretty clearly means “ask a question I can realistically answer”.
- Konohamaru 6y agoOut of curiosity how old are you?
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- rasz 6y agoebonics https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RrZlWw8Di10 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RrZlWw8Di10
- lacker 6y agoThat’s true. In general, if you customize the prompt for a specific type of question, GPT-3 will be better able to handle that type of question. Prompt size is limited, though, so if you are attempting to create a general-purpose chatbot out of GPT-3, you won’t be able to handle every archetype of question in the prompt.
- paraschopra 6y agoThanks for the tip. I incorporated this into the GPT-3 based search engine I'm hacking right now: https://twitter.com/paraschopra/status/1284905727388028928 https://twitter.com/paraschopra/status/1284905727388028928
- darkerside 6y agoI'm sure I'm not the only one who knows people that can't say "I don't know", to the point they're not far off from the first example.