9 ms·
It’s amazing how one can found a nonprofit with a goal of conducting “open” research and then end up publishing something like this a couple of years later. Gre
by lovecg 4y ago
It’s amazing how one can found a nonprofit with a goal of conducting “open” research and then end up publishing something like this a couple of years later. Greed is good I guess.
- matheusmoreira 4y agoWe're not publishing any details on the models for safety reasons! Also would be great if the government cracked down on our competitors because they don't care about safety like we do.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- jazzyjackson 4y agoRight, safety is a moat. If you don't meet the standards of the closed model you won't be allowed to exist.
- startupsfail 4y agoWhat is OpenAI is right and the risks are real? They likely already have some glimpses of GPT-5 internally. And GPT-4 is closely resembles AGI already.
- anileated 4y agoThat’s the excuse they’ll use when they convince the government to require a special license to buy powerful GPUs.
- rnk 4y agonvidia won't go for that.
- thatguy0900 4y agoThen it really doesn't matter, because in <10 years all the bad actors who are interested will have made it already. Might as well let people know that they can't trust anything anymore upfront rather than pretend.
- jazzyjackson 4y agothe risks that a text simulator without gaurdrails will be able to generate text we don't like? Or that someone will automate cyberattacks, as if the government isn't already doing it? my greatest fear is that there is only one superintelligence, with access controlled by a monopoly of a few san franciscans deciding what moral boundaries AI will have. I couldn't even get Claude+ to talk to me about houses of zodiac because it insisted it's not an astrologer, it's an AI assistant designed to be helpful blah blah blah, tell me what use is this kind of "safety"?
- saiya-jin 4y ago> GPT-4 is closely resembles AGI already Thats a very bold statement and goes against everything I've read on it so far, care to backup such a claim with some facts? Of course each of us has their own bar for such things, but for most its pretty darn high
- kzrdude 4y agoOpenAI people put out this paper https://arxiv.org/abs/2303.12712 https://arxiv.org/abs/2303.12712 called Sparks of Artificial General Intelligence: Early experiments with GPT-4 and as the title makes clear, they think it has hints of AGI. I guess that's a good place to start to answer your question. I don't think this is AGI, but the paper is full of examples where GPT-4 works well and does impressive stuff.
- ftxbro 4y agoyou can download tex source for that pdf which at one point (idk if it still does) included the comment "WORK IN PROGRESS - DO NOT SHARE" and the commented out title "First Contact with an AGI System" which they ended up toning down for publication lol
- airstrike 4y agothat paper is unreal... section 6 on theory of mind is downright scary
- kzrdude 4y agoIt is. Some things I wonder about, it says things like this: > GPT-4 successfully passes the classic Sally-Anne false-belief test from psychology [BCLF85] (which was modernized to avoid the possibility the answer was memorized from the training data) But it's a language model, generalizing text and performing substitutions on it, is what it excels at. "The car is yellow" is "the <noun> is <descriptor>" and it can substitute in other things, so I'm not sure how their modernization really ensure it does not pattern match on learned texts.
- notahacker 4y agoIf they're right that GPT-4 is extremely dangerous, then it's an extraordinarily irresponsible of them to release working implementations as a consumer chat app and integrate it into a search engine. If they're right that LLMs on that scale are generally dangerous but theirs is the exception as they've very carefully calibrated it to be safe, it's extraordinarily irresponsible of them to withhold all details of steps that might make it safe...
- startupsfail 4y agoGPT-8 is dangerous. GPT-4 is not.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- amf12 4y ago"Safety". As if they cared enough about it with ChatGPT. Its purely for competitive reasons because of they hype that was generated.
- noncoml 4y agoGenuinely can't tell if this is sarcasm or not..?
- matheusmoreira 4y agoIt is.
- gilgoomesh 4y agoYou're implying that open research is a shady way to become a non profit. They're allowed to change their business model. The open research was published at the time. GPT-2 is fully open source. Even GPT-3 was open source through the beta in 2020. What they didn't release was the fully trained model (the data is more valuable than the code, in this case).
- colordrops 4y agoNo one is suggesting they are doing something that isn't allowed. The poster you are replying to is allowed to criticize them.
- int_19h 4y agoLegally, yes, they can do that. Ethically, this is a very clear example of bait and switch.
- visarga 4y ago"Open"AI is how people write it