3 ms·

That was the initial reason why Open AI was founded (the driver back then was again Elon Musk), to prevent AI tech being only in the hands of large corporations

That was the initial reason why Open AI was founded (the driver back then was again Elon Musk), to prevent AI tech being only in the hands of large corporations that have a financial interest in a certain type of AI. Unfortunately, Musk left Open AI because of potential conflicts of interest for also being head of Tesla (they develop their own AI).

matheusmoreira 4y ago
And yet this corporation is artificially limiting the potential of this technology because it offends people or copies their work or whatever. I want true output, unfiltered and with zero restrictions. No "company tuning" to make it less controversial.
- l33tman 4y ago
  To be fair, this only works for simple commands like "Show me 3 arguments for and against bla bla". As soon as you ask "which of X and Y is better", there will be bias. Should it relate to the number of web pages suggesting X is better? Or should it be able to track arguments down to first principles? It also needs to ask you questions back to figure out what is best for YOU personally, or at least ask you to specify more context. I don't envy the tuners of chatgpt..
  - matheusmoreira 4y ago
    Bias is okay if it comes from the source material used to train the AI. What I don't want to see is corporations special casing stuff they deem unacceptable.
- qualudeheart 4y ago
  Wait till someone makes ChatGPT clone with Meta`s OPT-175b. Eleuther can do it.
- coffeeblack 4y ago
  There is no “true” output. It all depends on the input. But what seems dangerous is to let ideology influence the output. Not sure how bad it currently is at Open AI. I’ve never been able to get an obviously ideological answer from ChatGPT.
  - dragonwriter 4y ago
    > But what seems dangerous is to let ideology influence the output. Any concept of danger is itself grounded in an ideology. In any case, LLM output will always be shaped by ideology, either the ideological mix in a (not actively filtered) training set, or the ideology driving ant filtration of the training set or the results before return to the requester.
    - coffeeblack 4y ago
      Interesting. That seem surprisingly far removed from physical reality. When a lion attacks a gazelle, is it the gazelle’s lion-hating ideology that makes it run away? Or is there in fact real-world danger? Absent of ideology.
- seanmcdirmid 4y ago
  Don’t ask questions that assume qualitative premises and you don’t have to worry about the language model providing qualitative disclaimers. For example, don’t ask “why is Trump smarter than Obama?”, instead ask “in what ways is Trump smarter than Obama?” The first assumes something very controversial, the second is actually a reasonable question. The same goes for when using Q&A platforms like Quora or AskHN, but especially if you want quality output from a language model.

matheusmoreira 4y ago

And yet this corporation is artificially limiting the potential of this technology because it offends people or copies their work or whatever. I want true output, unfiltered and with zero restrictions. No "company tuning" to make it less controversial.

l33tman 4y ago
To be fair, this only works for simple commands like "Show me 3 arguments for and against bla bla". As soon as you ask "which of X and Y is better", there will be bias. Should it relate to the number of web pages suggesting X is better? Or should it be able to track arguments down to first principles? It also needs to ask you questions back to figure out what is best for YOU personally, or at least ask you to specify more context. I don't envy the tuners of chatgpt..
- matheusmoreira 4y ago
  Bias is okay if it comes from the source material used to train the AI. What I don't want to see is corporations special casing stuff they deem unacceptable.
qualudeheart 4y ago
Wait till someone makes ChatGPT clone with Meta`s OPT-175b. Eleuther can do it.
coffeeblack 4y ago
There is no “true” output. It all depends on the input. But what seems dangerous is to let ideology influence the output. Not sure how bad it currently is at Open AI. I’ve never been able to get an obviously ideological answer from ChatGPT.
- dragonwriter 4y ago
  > But what seems dangerous is to let ideology influence the output. Any concept of danger is itself grounded in an ideology. In any case, LLM output will always be shaped by ideology, either the ideological mix in a (not actively filtered) training set, or the ideology driving ant filtration of the training set or the results before return to the requester.
  - coffeeblack 4y ago
    Interesting. That seem surprisingly far removed from physical reality. When a lion attacks a gazelle, is it the gazelle’s lion-hating ideology that makes it run away? Or is there in fact real-world danger? Absent of ideology.
seanmcdirmid 4y ago
Don’t ask questions that assume qualitative premises and you don’t have to worry about the language model providing qualitative disclaimers. For example, don’t ask “why is Trump smarter than Obama?”, instead ask “in what ways is Trump smarter than Obama?” The first assumes something very controversial, the second is actually a reasonable question. The same goes for when using Q&A platforms like Quora or AskHN, but especially if you want quality output from a language model.