3 ms·
I think it's exactly the opposite: researchers are currently studying models that are better than ChatGPT. The reason why when we use one of the open source mod
by GTP 3y ago
I think it's exactly the opposite: researchers are currently studying models that are better than ChatGPT. The reason why when we use one of the open source models those tend to feel worse than ChatGPT is twofold:
1. Those models are usually optimized to run on an average PC, at the cost of accuracy
2. The researchers behind it don't have the kind of money that OpenAI has for training, but this doesn't mean that the model itself is less advanced than ChatGPT.
I also suggest to read a somewhat famous Google memo that leaked a few months ago [1].
[1] https://www.semianalysis.com/p/google-we-have-no-moat-and-neither https://www.semianalysis.com/p/google-we-have-no-moat-and-ne...
- bsaul 3y agothat's why i was mentioning the gap between better in theory and in practice. My feeling is that the transition between something that looks fantastic in a lab, and something that can actually be used as a product, like chatGPT is pretty hard.
- GTP 3y agoBut this has nothing to do with the quality of a consultancy from university researchers. They know very well how the models work and the direction the research is taking, they not having the same amount of money available for training is irrelevant w.r.t. their ability to provide advice and guidance in policy making. And even if I was wrong about this, the link I provided in the previous comment explains how the money required to effectively train those models is rapidly dropping, making the advantage of companies like OpenAI smaller and smaller.