3 ms·

"Guardrails" But yes, you're right. We've seen how dangerous open systems can be. Hackers and scammers have shown us that we need guardrails against operating

"Guardrails" But yes, you're right. We've seen how dangerous open systems can be. Hackers and scammers have shown us that we need guardrails against operating systems and the web, as you correctly point out. It's time for some legislation that locks the down so the unwashed masses don't have unfettered access to them, don't you agree?

TaylorAlexander 3y ago
I would much prefer you state directly what you believe than use this mocking facetious tone. It’s not really possible to engage with anything you’re saying because I’d have to guess at how to invert your insinuations. Anyway I think it’s fine for these systems to be available as open source, I’m not suggesting they be withheld from the public. But when you offer it as a cloud service people associate its output with your brand and I think this could end up harming Twitter’s brand.
dbmikus 3y ago
The case study of "no guardrails" already played out: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tay_(chatbot) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tay_(chatbot) Microsoft did not like what they got and shut it down because it ended up being a 4chan troll.
- sterlind 3y ago
  Tay got that way because it was effectively fine-tuned by an overwhelming number of tweets from 4chan edgelords. that's a little more extreme than "no guardrails," it was de facto conditioned into being a neo-Nazi. a generic instruction-tuned LLM won't act like that.
  - dbmikus 3y ago
    The instruction-tuning is the guard rail. What other guard-rails is X AI removing? Just curious if I'm missing something.
    - sterlind 3y ago
      Instruction-tuning isn't typically considered a guard rail. Raw pretrained LLMs are close to useless, since they just predict text. Guard-rails are when you train the AI not to obey certain instructions.
      - dbmikus 3y ago
        Good point about the negative reinforcement training! Instruction tuning is on top of the base LLM and is often RLHF to train the base LLM to produce certain kinds of responses.
  - RamenJunkie_ 3y ago
    Yeah, instead of being trained on 4chan Nazis like Tay was, Grok is trained on Twitter Nazis. Much better.

TaylorAlexander 3y ago

I would much prefer you state directly what you believe than use this mocking facetious tone. It’s not really possible to engage with anything you’re saying because I’d have to guess at how to invert your insinuations. Anyway I think it’s fine for these systems to be available as open source, I’m not suggesting they be withheld from the public. But when you offer it as a cloud service people associate its output with your brand and I think this could end up harming Twitter’s brand.

dbmikus 3y ago

The case study of "no guardrails" already played out: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tay_(chatbot) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tay_(chatbot) Microsoft did not like what they got and shut it down because it ended up being a 4chan troll.

sterlind 3y ago
Tay got that way because it was effectively fine-tuned by an overwhelming number of tweets from 4chan edgelords. that's a little more extreme than "no guardrails," it was de facto conditioned into being a neo-Nazi. a generic instruction-tuned LLM won't act like that.
- dbmikus 3y ago
  The instruction-tuning is the guard rail. What other guard-rails is X AI removing? Just curious if I'm missing something.
  - sterlind 3y ago
    Instruction-tuning isn't typically considered a guard rail. Raw pretrained LLMs are close to useless, since they just predict text. Guard-rails are when you train the AI not to obey certain instructions.
    - dbmikus 3y ago
      Good point about the negative reinforcement training! Instruction tuning is on top of the base LLM and is often RLHF to train the base LLM to produce certain kinds of responses.
- RamenJunkie_ 3y ago
  Yeah, instead of being trained on 4chan Nazis like Tay was, Grok is trained on Twitter Nazis. Much better.