4 ms·
An xAI engineer replied: > The issue here is that the web is full of ChatGPT outputs, so we accidentally picked up some of them when we trained Grok on a larg
by minimaxir 3y ago
An xAI engineer replied:
> The issue here is that the web is full of ChatGPT outputs, so we accidentally picked up some of them when we trained Grok on a large amount of web data. This was a huge surprise to us when we first noticed it. For what it’s worth, the issue is very rare and now that we’re aware of it we’ll make sure that future versions of Grok don’t have this problem. Don’t worry, no OpenAI code was used to make Grok.
https://twitter.com/ibab_ml/status/1733558576982155274 https://twitter.com/ibab_ml/status/1733558576982155274
- timdorr 3y agoIt was a huge surprise that ChatGPT is popular?
- thorncorona 3y agoThe amount of AI generated SEO spam.
- dools 3y agoHow much SEO spam has chatGPT refusing to do things in it though?
- voiceblue 3y agoIsn’t this tantamount to an admission of willfully flaunting copyright law? Edit: I'm not 100% sure, but I think my comment is being interpreted uncharitably. I would like to grab your finger, which is pressed squarely atop "output of other LLMs", and move it over a bit to the label of "website with unknown and almost certainly copyright content". And then, I would like to point out that there is a difference between training on such data with the benefit of plausible deniability (e.g. some third party), versus going specifically after data you know to be copyrighted, and then claiming that this is precisely the reason why your model will spit such content out verbatim. At that point, you might as well indict yourself, no?
- WillPostForFood 3y agoIf you consider learning from reading copyrighted material flaunting copyright law, then yes. If you think flaunting copyright law is limited to reproduction of copyright law, then no.
- simonw 3y agoShow me a useful LLM that hasn't been trained on copyrighted data. (I'm hoping it's possible to do that, but I've not seen an example yet.)
- minimaxir 3y agoTechnically the original BERT was mostly trained on Wikipedia (with some potentially-copyrighted books in BookCorpora)
- simonw 3y agoYeah that's what I was trying to hint at when I said "useful" - I'm looking for a general purpose LLM, GPT-3 level or higher. (BERT was useful but not GPT-3 useful.)
- eli 3y agoWikipedia content is also copyrighted, and it’s unlikely that an LLM reproducing it is compatible with its license terms.
- tomcam 3y agoAll LLMs have this potential problem. In the USA whether it flouts copyright will inevitably be determined by the Supreme Court.
- eli 3y agoCongress. Supreme Court isn’t supposed to make new laws and the current ones plainly don’t cover this situation.
- joe_the_user 3y agoWhile it's plausible xAI isn't just a wrapper, all the chatbots seem to a sort of not-very-selective digestion of much of the Internet's text. It seems they're oozing towards a muddy average of each other - "I am chatGPT/xAI/Bard/etc" is vaguely true for all of them.
- 3cats-in-a-coat 3y agoThey didn't accidentally pick up anything. Grok is extremely consistent in both referring to OpenAI in refusals, and also using the full repertoire of GPT-ism in its other responses, such as ending every message with an "Overall, ..." or "In conclusion, ..." section. They RLHF-ed Grok on GPT output, specifically and in volume. Maybe sourced via the API or other means, I don't know. But Igor's explanation that "this is very rare" makes no sense after you play with Grok for even 5 minutes.
- dools 3y agoThat’s a lie