it's an interesting example of how much seemingly superficial, non-fundamental things can matter. A lot of AI experts are asserting (probably correctly) that O

it's an interesting example of how much seemingly superficial, non-fundamental things can matter. A lot of AI experts are asserting (probably correctly) that Open AI really has done nothing new and is just putting a shiny sticker on what was already known and published research. But human perception being what it is, having ChatGPT produce a beautifully formed, polite and friendly sentence seems massively better to lay people than a response that has a more terse, unpolished output. It won't surprise me if there is already a giant layer of heuristics pasted on the end of the Transformer model for ChatGPT cleaning up all sorts of ugly corner cases which researchers would hold highly impure and completely value-less while it actually is responsible for a large amount of ChatGPT's success. I think there is a bit of a lesson there in terms of how much academia does undervalue the polishing part of research work, even if fundamentals ultimately drive progress.