2 ms·

> Not sure where their head is at but unless they are oriented around these three things they’re never going to catch up. But ChatGPT is doing exactly the same

> Not sure where their head is at but unless they are oriented around these three things they’re never going to catch up. But ChatGPT is doing exactly the same. There's more energy spent trying to manipulate the output to be politically correct than actual energy spent making the AI more powerful.

sebzim4500 4y ago
I doubt that's true, they just talk about it more because everything else is kind of a trade secret.
Karunamon 4y ago
I get what you're saying here and agree, but there is no world in which openai exists as a continuing concern without making their product overly PC. Remember that their model was trained on a broad swath of the Internet, warts and all. They can either spend the effort making it aligned with the current thing up front, or they can rush to do it after the model outputs something spicy and they have to deal with the resulting PR shitstorm, outrage baiting hit pieces, and otherwise distractions.
PeterisP 4y ago
That seems reasonable - if you're trying to create a market for a publicly-available chat-AI, and making a demo freely available for PR/advertising purposes, then the public perception of that demo is critical to your business. If they had just put up the same model without that attempt to make GPT wear a politically-correct mask, they'd just get another Microsoft Tay event, and only get a buttload of negative publicity for their investment. For an internal application used for specific practical tasks, sure, focus on making it more powerful; but if you want a demo for general public as a 'pre-sales advertisement'? You bet that political correctness has to be there.
- redox99 4y ago
  If ChatGPT is useful people are going to use it anyway, even if there is negative publicity because when you bait it with "Is X race superior to Y race?" it gives you a non PC answer.
  - PeterisP 4y ago
    ChatGPT isn't the only game in town, and corporate purchasing departments (which are the actual target audience) will then rather buy a similar service from Google or someone else, even if it's slightly worse, rather than have to explain themselves (and risk their personal position) to why they're using the toxic taboo thing that's reviled by the press.

sebzim4500 4y ago

I doubt that's true, they just talk about it more because everything else is kind of a trade secret.

Karunamon 4y ago

I get what you're saying here and agree, but there is no world in which openai exists as a continuing concern without making their product overly PC. Remember that their model was trained on a broad swath of the Internet, warts and all. They can either spend the effort making it aligned with the current thing up front, or they can rush to do it after the model outputs something spicy and they have to deal with the resulting PR shitstorm, outrage baiting hit pieces, and otherwise distractions.

PeterisP 4y ago

That seems reasonable - if you're trying to create a market for a publicly-available chat-AI, and making a demo freely available for PR/advertising purposes, then the public perception of that demo is critical to your business. If they had just put up the same model without that attempt to make GPT wear a politically-correct mask, they'd just get another Microsoft Tay event, and only get a buttload of negative publicity for their investment. For an internal application used for specific practical tasks, sure, focus on making it more powerful; but if you want a demo for general public as a 'pre-sales advertisement'? You bet that political correctness has to be there.

redox99 4y ago
If ChatGPT is useful people are going to use it anyway, even if there is negative publicity because when you bait it with "Is X race superior to Y race?" it gives you a non PC answer.
- PeterisP 4y ago
  ChatGPT isn't the only game in town, and corporate purchasing departments (which are the actual target audience) will then rather buy a similar service from Google or someone else, even if it's slightly worse, rather than have to explain themselves (and risk their personal position) to why they're using the toxic taboo thing that's reviled by the press.