4 ms·

Not to argue with anything you said but just as an aside, the Bing habit you mention doesn't seem to be from the LLM itself, but from some censorship module tha

Not to argue with anything you said but just as an aside, the Bing habit you mention doesn't seem to be from the LLM itself, but from some censorship module that has been bolted in. In the first few days after release, it would get really confrontational (and sometimes emotional) with some users and this attracted bad press, so now it ends the conversation before getting into any remotely thorny issue. There's also another censorship module that sometimes deletes its output before it has finished.

robertlagrant 3y ago
> it would get really confrontational (and sometimes emotional) with some users Nitpick: it was trained to respond with emotional responses by the safety people involved. It wasn't getting emotional itself!
- FeepingCreature 3y ago
  So, if as a young child I've learnt to behave emotionally in order to participate in society, my emotions are ... not even "not real" but "not mine"? I mean, we can argue realness, but surely I'm still the one having them. This feels like a "free will" debate, where if we can explain how a decision was made, that deprives the person of their agency. The model being trained to respond emotionally is why it is getting emotional itself.
  - idontpost 3y ago
    [dead]
  - robertlagrant 3y ago
    > So, if as a young child I've learnt to behave emotionally in order to participate in society, my emotions are ... not even "not real" but "not mine"? I mean, we can argue realness, but surely I'm still the one having them. Your emotions aren't purely imitative based on what your parents encouraged. They come from inside you from chemicals diffusing in your brain. Kids aren't blank slates that respond perfectly to training. > This feels like a "free will" debate, where if we can explain how a decision was made, that deprives the person of their agency. The model being trained to respond emotionally is why it is getting emotional itself. No, it's just a distinction based on the meaning of "get emotional". I'm saying it wasn't getting emotional. It was responding with emotionally charged text responses, as they were trained into it.
    - FeepingCreature 3y ago
      > Your emotions aren't purely imitative based on what your parents encouraged. They come from inside you from chemicals diffusing in your brain. Kids aren't blank slates that respond perfectly to training. If a kid was a blank slate that responded perfectly to training, would its emotions then not be its own? > No, it's just a distinction based on the meaning of "get emotional". I'm saying it wasn't getting emotional. It was responding with emotionally charged text responses, as they were trained into it. What's the difference between a chemical concentration in the brain and the activation level of a neuron trained to predict the outcomes of chemical concentration in the brain? Sufficiently advanced imitation is indistinguishable from identity.
      - robertlagrant 3y ago
        > If a kid was a blank slate that responded perfectly to training, would its emotions then not be its own? No idea what this means. What is "responded perfectly to training"? > What's the difference between a chemical concentration in the brain and the activation level of a neuron trained to predict the outcomes of chemical concentration in the brain? Sufficiently advanced imitation is indistinguishable from identity. One is emotional; the other statistical. Is my monitor emotional for showing the words on the screen based on an electrical activation passed to a twisty crystal? All sorts of things convey things, but the actual emotion came from a person with emotions.
famouswaffles 3y ago
Ignoring users was something that was happening from the very beginning. It was just much less abrupt and more conversational/no obvious triggers that wouldn't already be present. You could even still send messages(but you'd be ignored) Examples https://www.reddit.com/r/ChatGPT/s/bXrDW2plxG https://www.reddit.com/r/ChatGPT/s/bXrDW2plxG (pic 5) https://www.reddit.com/r/ChatGPT/s/tc3Iaf5GKc https://www.reddit.com/r/ChatGPT/s/tc3Iaf5GKc At least here, it's clear that even if Bing wasn't actually receiving text and predicting a "no token" response then it was able to send an API request that cut off the chat. May be implemented differently now though.

robertlagrant 3y ago

> it would get really confrontational (and sometimes emotional) with some users Nitpick: it was trained to respond with emotional responses by the safety people involved. It wasn't getting emotional itself!

FeepingCreature 3y ago
So, if as a young child I've learnt to behave emotionally in order to participate in society, my emotions are ... not even "not real" but "not mine"? I mean, we can argue realness, but surely I'm still the one having them. This feels like a "free will" debate, where if we can explain how a decision was made, that deprives the person of their agency. The model being trained to respond emotionally is why it is getting emotional itself.
- idontpost 3y ago
  [dead]
- robertlagrant 3y ago
  > So, if as a young child I've learnt to behave emotionally in order to participate in society, my emotions are ... not even "not real" but "not mine"? I mean, we can argue realness, but surely I'm still the one having them. Your emotions aren't purely imitative based on what your parents encouraged. They come from inside you from chemicals diffusing in your brain. Kids aren't blank slates that respond perfectly to training. > This feels like a "free will" debate, where if we can explain how a decision was made, that deprives the person of their agency. The model being trained to respond emotionally is why it is getting emotional itself. No, it's just a distinction based on the meaning of "get emotional". I'm saying it wasn't getting emotional. It was responding with emotionally charged text responses, as they were trained into it.
  - FeepingCreature 3y ago
    > Your emotions aren't purely imitative based on what your parents encouraged. They come from inside you from chemicals diffusing in your brain. Kids aren't blank slates that respond perfectly to training. If a kid was a blank slate that responded perfectly to training, would its emotions then not be its own? > No, it's just a distinction based on the meaning of "get emotional". I'm saying it wasn't getting emotional. It was responding with emotionally charged text responses, as they were trained into it. What's the difference between a chemical concentration in the brain and the activation level of a neuron trained to predict the outcomes of chemical concentration in the brain? Sufficiently advanced imitation is indistinguishable from identity.
    - robertlagrant 3y ago
      > If a kid was a blank slate that responded perfectly to training, would its emotions then not be its own? No idea what this means. What is "responded perfectly to training"? > What's the difference between a chemical concentration in the brain and the activation level of a neuron trained to predict the outcomes of chemical concentration in the brain? Sufficiently advanced imitation is indistinguishable from identity. One is emotional; the other statistical. Is my monitor emotional for showing the words on the screen based on an electrical activation passed to a twisty crystal? All sorts of things convey things, but the actual emotion came from a person with emotions.

famouswaffles 3y ago

Ignoring users was something that was happening from the very beginning. It was just much less abrupt and more conversational/no obvious triggers that wouldn't already be present. You could even still send messages(but you'd be ignored) Examples https://www.reddit.com/r/ChatGPT/s/bXrDW2plxG https://www.reddit.com/r/ChatGPT/s/bXrDW2plxG (pic 5) https://www.reddit.com/r/ChatGPT/s/tc3Iaf5GKc https://www.reddit.com/r/ChatGPT/s/tc3Iaf5GKc At least here, it's clear that even if Bing wasn't actually receiving text and predicting a "no token" response then it was able to send an API request that cut off the chat. May be implemented differently now though.