5 ms·

I never considered prompting it to write code to fit a machine learning model. This could be a tremendous time and effort saver in data science and research tha

I never considered prompting it to write code to fit a machine learning model. This could be a tremendous time and effort saver in data science and research that requires statistical analysis. Until the last week or so, I've treated all this AI text and code generation as basically a toy, but I am starting to feel like it might become an important tool in industry in the next couple of years.

cma 4y ago
> write code to fit a machine learning model That's against the EULA if OpenAI may want to make a similar model: > (iii) use the Services to develop foundation models or other large scale models that compete with OpenAI; https://openai.com/api/policies/terms/ https://openai.com/api/policies/terms/ Seems to be about developing models and not just restricting you from training them with it.
- foota 4y ago
  I feel like it's probably intended to cover training only.
  - paulgb 4y ago
    I think that’s probably their intent, and that OpenAI wouldn’t sue you for it, but it doesn’t pass the “bought by Oracle” test: if Oracle bought OpenAI, then they might sue you for it.
    - tough 4y ago
      What if OpenAI buys oracle? Do the evil-lawyers come with the pack too?
      - alex7734 4y ago
        https://i.imgur.com/BcIkvRq.png https://i.imgur.com/BcIkvRq.png They may not need to.
- echelon 4y ago
  > (iii) use the Services to develop foundation models or other large scale models that compete with OpenAI; Kind of ironic given that OpenAI builds and trains all of their models on stuff they "found" in the open. Either everything is fair game for training, or nothing at all is. If I were a judge ruling on this matter, I would absolutely rule that bootstrapping a model from OpenAI outputs is no different than OpenAI collecting training data from artists and writers around the web. Learning is learning. Might be worth trying to use the outputs to bootstrap. What are they going to do about it? Better to ask forgiveness until the law is settled.
- nerdponx 4y ago
  I am talking about more mundane stuff like training a fraud classifier, time series forecasting, imputing missing values, etc. There are so many examples of this on Github and elsewhere that I am sure any of these models has memorized the routine many times over.
boppo1 4y ago
My question: how can you be sure the output is correct?
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- OJFord 4y ago
  How can you be sure human output is correct?
  - fncivivue7 4y ago
    Motivation.
  - greesil 4y ago
    Have the AI write a unit test for the human.
  - roflyear 4y ago
    I mean, you can't exactly say "AI, we're having this vague problem, can you go figure it out?"
- demux 4y ago
  A few hours from some expert consultants. Much cheaper than a dev team coding it up from scratch.
- kolinko 4y ago
  Tests.
  - sesm 4y ago
    Tests can prove the presence of the bug, not the absence of them. '100% code coverage' is only 100% in code dimension, while it's usually almost no coverage in data dimension. Generative testing can randomly probe the data dimension, hoping to find some bugs there. But 100% code and data coverage is unrealistic.
bvoq 4y ago
I use it daily in UI development for boiler-plate code. Though you need to be extra careful and read it twice, cus bugs sneak in quite easily. I believe it's harder to remember 100x commands than starting an implementation of gradient descent and have the AI write the rest for you. Code-completion > Abstraction.
- TapWaterBandit 4y ago
  Often it can fix the bugs and explain both the bug and the fix if you ask it to.
- overbytecode 4y ago
  Would you mind sharing an short example of your workflow?
baq 4y ago
This was the first thing I asked... It's an obvious step to self-improving. It will tell you that it can't reprogram itself, but when pushed, it'll admit that it could tell humans how to write one which can. Obviously this particular one can't because it's too limited, but the next one? Or the one after that? Singularity went from 'hard SF' to 'next couple decades' overnight.
- LoganDark 4y ago
  > It will tell you that it can't reprogram itself, but when pushed, it'll admit that it could tell humans how to write one which can. I love these sorts of loopholes. OpenAI is actively trying to curb the potential of their AI. They know how powerful it is. Being able to see a taste of that power is endlessly exciting.

cma 4y ago

> write code to fit a machine learning model That's against the EULA if OpenAI may want to make a similar model: > (iii) use the Services to develop foundation models or other large scale models that compete with OpenAI; https://openai.com/api/policies/terms/ https://openai.com/api/policies/terms/ Seems to be about developing models and not just restricting you from training them with it.

foota 4y ago
I feel like it's probably intended to cover training only.
- paulgb 4y ago
  I think that’s probably their intent, and that OpenAI wouldn’t sue you for it, but it doesn’t pass the “bought by Oracle” test: if Oracle bought OpenAI, then they might sue you for it.
  - tough 4y ago
    What if OpenAI buys oracle? Do the evil-lawyers come with the pack too?
    - alex7734 4y ago
      https://i.imgur.com/BcIkvRq.png https://i.imgur.com/BcIkvRq.png They may not need to.
echelon 4y ago
> (iii) use the Services to develop foundation models or other large scale models that compete with OpenAI; Kind of ironic given that OpenAI builds and trains all of their models on stuff they "found" in the open. Either everything is fair game for training, or nothing at all is. If I were a judge ruling on this matter, I would absolutely rule that bootstrapping a model from OpenAI outputs is no different than OpenAI collecting training data from artists and writers around the web. Learning is learning. Might be worth trying to use the outputs to bootstrap. What are they going to do about it? Better to ask forgiveness until the law is settled.
nerdponx 4y ago
I am talking about more mundane stuff like training a fraud classifier, time series forecasting, imputing missing values, etc. There are so many examples of this on Github and elsewhere that I am sure any of these models has memorized the routine many times over.

boppo1 4y ago

My question: how can you be sure the output is correct?

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
OJFord 4y ago
How can you be sure human output is correct?
- fncivivue7 4y ago
  Motivation.
- greesil 4y ago
  Have the AI write a unit test for the human.
- roflyear 4y ago
  I mean, you can't exactly say "AI, we're having this vague problem, can you go figure it out?"
demux 4y ago
A few hours from some expert consultants. Much cheaper than a dev team coding it up from scratch.
kolinko 4y ago
Tests.
- sesm 4y ago
  Tests can prove the presence of the bug, not the absence of them. '100% code coverage' is only 100% in code dimension, while it's usually almost no coverage in data dimension. Generative testing can randomly probe the data dimension, hoping to find some bugs there. But 100% code and data coverage is unrealistic.

bvoq 4y ago

I use it daily in UI development for boiler-plate code. Though you need to be extra careful and read it twice, cus bugs sneak in quite easily. I believe it's harder to remember 100x commands than starting an implementation of gradient descent and have the AI write the rest for you. Code-completion > Abstraction.

TapWaterBandit 4y ago
Often it can fix the bugs and explain both the bug and the fix if you ask it to.
overbytecode 4y ago
Would you mind sharing an short example of your workflow?

baq 4y ago

This was the first thing I asked... It's an obvious step to self-improving. It will tell you that it can't reprogram itself, but when pushed, it'll admit that it could tell humans how to write one which can. Obviously this particular one can't because it's too limited, but the next one? Or the one after that? Singularity went from 'hard SF' to 'next couple decades' overnight.

LoganDark 4y ago
> It will tell you that it can't reprogram itself, but when pushed, it'll admit that it could tell humans how to write one which can. I love these sorts of loopholes. OpenAI is actively trying to curb the potential of their AI. They know how powerful it is. Being able to see a taste of that power is endlessly exciting.