2 ms·
> A few days later the same information was gone. I assumed someone might have decided to keep it on the low regarding having ingested all of these sources of r
by astrange 4y ago
> A few days later the same information was gone. I assumed someone might have decided to keep it on the low regarding having ingested all of these sources of restricted access content. I now get a generic blurb about the same question.
This didn't happen. There is no way to remove information from the model and retraining it costs millions of dollars.
- moneywoes 4y agoHow did they patch all the illegal stuff ChatGPT said at release?
- segmondy 4y agoYou can imagine a chain of GPTs, good chatGPT monitors your instruction and refuses to pass it to regular chatGPT. if your prompt does get passed in and generates an offensive content, monitor chatGPT will monitor to see if output said something bad and then refuse to return the result and apologize.
- astrange 4y agoSmaller side model that just prints the "umm sorry I can't do that" message. And they did retrain it at least once - that's why it got so much faster and why the model chooser has "default" and "legacy" GPT-3.5. Notice that if you hit regenerate it often actually answers the question though.
- nonethewiser 4y ago> How did they patch all the illegal stuff ChatGPT said at release? What did it say that was illegal? And where was it illegal? That seems non sensical. What text can a chat AI return that breaks the law?
- ruszki 4y agoI have no clear idea about the legality of AIs, but it definitely incited violence in several cases. If a person do it, it’s against the law even in the US.
- noobermin 4y agoNot retraining, likely traditional filtering before it is fed to chatgpt.