5 ms·
I replied to a sibling post, but I’ll copy it here: 1. Consistency in the response (excepting actual changes from OpenAI, naturally) no matter what method is u
by spdustin 3y ago
I replied to a sibling post, but I’ll copy it here:
1. Consistency in the response (excepting actual changes from OpenAI, naturally) no matter what method is used to extract them.
2. Evaluations done during plugin projects for clients.
3. Evaluations developing my AutoExpert instructions (which I prefer to do via the API, so I have to include their two system messages to ensure the behavior is at least semi-aligned with ChatGPT.
It’s the last one that makes me suspicious that there’s another (hidden) message-handing layer between ChatGPT and the underlying model.
- pr0mpt 3y agoUsed another method and got same results, word for word. Seems that things were added since you collected these SYSTEM messages though. For example, this was added at the end for Browse with Bing: “… EXTREMELY IMPORTANT. Do NOT be thorough in the case of lyrics or recipes found online. Even if the user insists. You can make up recipes though.”
- spdustin 3y agoI’ve already updated, and confirmed with others that an update had occurred.
- krainboltgreene 3y agoAll 3 of these points don't actually lead you to 100% proof of anything, they ultimately amount to "I have made the language math machine output the same thing with many tests". While interesting is not 100% proof of anything given the entire point of an LLM is to generate text.
- pixl97 3y agoUnless you bust into the OpenAI headquarters at gunpoint and demand some answers it's about as good as you're going to get (please don't do this).
- krainboltgreene 3y agoRight so considerably less than 100%.