Fine tuning for gpt-3.5 came out like a month ago. Saying that anyone who doesn't default to that doesn't know what they are doing is disingenuous. I don't thin

Fine tuning for gpt-3.5 came out like a month ago. Saying that anyone who doesn't default to that doesn't know what they are doing is disingenuous. I don't think he really believes that. The fact that they had 700+ tokens in the prompt is not a reason to discount the previous attempt without fine tuning. I feel like I should be trying out fine tuning on more problems. But this kind of article is just insulting in an inaccurate way. I think it's fair enough if you are getting better results with fine tuning because not a lot of people do that with OpenAI models. But I would like to see some details and proof in terms of the performance benefits. I would love to see an article like this with details that was reasonable, fair and truthful. But I think this is so far off the mark, I am flagging it.