2 ms·
Is changing the source of data really that innocuous? I find it not that surprising that the output changed with the input Especially considering this is the
by bravetraveler 4y ago
Is changing the source of data really that innocuous? I find it not that surprising that the output changed with the input
Especially considering this is the description for the model they left:
> higher quality, longer output and better instruction-following
and this is what they moved to:
> Very capable, but faster and lower cost than Davinci.
If nothing else, the adage 'you get what you pay for' works.
ref: https://platform.openai.com/docs/models https://platform.openai.com/docs/models
- cobertos 4y agoI've only been through a couple production outages, but at those companies, usually we'd get things patched and ask questions later. I could definitely imagine switching to another model that is made to sound like a smaller version of Davinci, at least from how it's been stored in my mind up until now.
- bravetraveler 4y agoI've been there quite a bit, and it's pretty true! It's best to worry about how the ship started sinking after you've saved it :p In that situation I still try to exercise my options a bit... Seeing that this new model is implicitly worse at following directions, knowing that 'production' (this is a Twitch channel) depends on obeying a certain set of rules... switching to it may be ill-advised. I don't want to be seen as overly judgmental - the Twitch channel comment works both ways; derogatory/supportive. I get why one wouldn't really foresee this or even care to. Then I wonder, why not leave it down for a bit? The hype train is fickle but it's not that precious, either.