4 ms·

I'm using ChatGPT occasionally and it's increasingly difficult getting straight answers with it. It's been neutered, you can't ask anything even slightly contro

I'm using ChatGPT occasionally and it's increasingly difficult getting straight answers with it. It's been neutered, you can't ask anything even slightly controversial. Having uncensored models is great.

yieldcrv 3y ago
ChatGPT4 isn't like that But I dont like it knowing my question history
- flir 3y ago
  Seems like GPT4 via the API is even less nerfed (my impression). More expensive though, obivously. Does make me wonder how much of it's training and how much of it is throwing less compute at the answer.
  - zingelshuher 3y ago
    > Seems like GPT4 via the API is even less nerfed (my impression). More expensive though, obivously. Not that obvious. If I remember correctly the last model they were still testing was $10/1M_tokens input $30/1M_tokens output. 1M is about all Harry Potter books. ChatGPT Pro is $20/month. Do you really type in one Harry Potter book every month? It took ms. Rowling about a year, she is professional, you know. For heavy users GPT Pro may be cheaper, but for most API is a good option. Not as convenient, and long dialogs may add up. It costs nothing if not used.
    - ceinewydd 3y ago
      [dead]
    - flir 3y ago
      Very very interesting, I confess I hadn't done the maths. I think throwing a large context window back and forth might add up quite quickly, but it's worth setting up my own interface over the API (I'm just using `mods` right now) just to see what my real-world usage looks like.
monkpit 3y ago
I feel GPT3.5 is more cautious than GPT4. I tried asking 3.5 something about historical tax rates over the past 10 years in the US and it refused to answer because it’s a political topic or something. GPT4 answered right away. I’m not sure if it has something to do with the paywall of GPT4, or if GPT4 can better determine which things are political and which aren’t? Interesting nonetheless.
wkat4242 3y ago
The weasly lawyers from OpenAI have really screwed up what could be a great service otherwise yes. And there's like no point to it because there's so many jailbreaks that work fine. Just open it up.
- toomuchtodo 3y ago
  The problem isn’t OpenAI. The problem is the jurisdiction and the potential unfavorable outcomes from operating within it (legal, regulatory, reputational, etc). This is why, for certain use cases, local model operation will always be superior. A corporation is a target, whack a mole is futile (as piracy shows).
  - wkat4242 3y ago
    Still, others in the same jurisdiction are a lot looser on this. Like Twitter's chatbot (I know Elon musk is a bit of an exception to the rule but still). Microsoft also had a chatbot that was pretty uncensored (and turned into a nazi in a couple days... :X )
jpalawaga 3y ago
Maybe it’s a cost thing. Short circuit inference whenever possible.
- ovohcoc 3y ago
  it actually causes more inference to take place. the prompt goes through a safety model in parallel with the real model, then the response goes through a safety model
  - KTibow 3y ago
    That part isn't what they were talking about, they were just talking about the practice of not responding at the LLM level
panarky 3y ago
Do you have examples of facts that LLama 2 provides that are censored on GPT-4?

yieldcrv 3y ago

ChatGPT4 isn't like that But I dont like it knowing my question history

flir 3y ago
Seems like GPT4 via the API is even less nerfed (my impression). More expensive though, obivously. Does make me wonder how much of it's training and how much of it is throwing less compute at the answer.
- zingelshuher 3y ago
  > Seems like GPT4 via the API is even less nerfed (my impression). More expensive though, obivously. Not that obvious. If I remember correctly the last model they were still testing was $10/1M_tokens input $30/1M_tokens output. 1M is about all Harry Potter books. ChatGPT Pro is $20/month. Do you really type in one Harry Potter book every month? It took ms. Rowling about a year, she is professional, you know. For heavy users GPT Pro may be cheaper, but for most API is a good option. Not as convenient, and long dialogs may add up. It costs nothing if not used.
  - ceinewydd 3y ago
    [dead]
  - flir 3y ago
    Very very interesting, I confess I hadn't done the maths. I think throwing a large context window back and forth might add up quite quickly, but it's worth setting up my own interface over the API (I'm just using `mods` right now) just to see what my real-world usage looks like.

monkpit 3y ago

I feel GPT3.5 is more cautious than GPT4. I tried asking 3.5 something about historical tax rates over the past 10 years in the US and it refused to answer because it’s a political topic or something. GPT4 answered right away. I’m not sure if it has something to do with the paywall of GPT4, or if GPT4 can better determine which things are political and which aren’t? Interesting nonetheless.

wkat4242 3y ago

The weasly lawyers from OpenAI have really screwed up what could be a great service otherwise yes. And there's like no point to it because there's so many jailbreaks that work fine. Just open it up.

toomuchtodo 3y ago
The problem isn’t OpenAI. The problem is the jurisdiction and the potential unfavorable outcomes from operating within it (legal, regulatory, reputational, etc). This is why, for certain use cases, local model operation will always be superior. A corporation is a target, whack a mole is futile (as piracy shows).
- wkat4242 3y ago
  Still, others in the same jurisdiction are a lot looser on this. Like Twitter's chatbot (I know Elon musk is a bit of an exception to the rule but still). Microsoft also had a chatbot that was pretty uncensored (and turned into a nazi in a couple days... :X )

jpalawaga 3y ago

Maybe it’s a cost thing. Short circuit inference whenever possible.

ovohcoc 3y ago
it actually causes more inference to take place. the prompt goes through a safety model in parallel with the real model, then the response goes through a safety model
- KTibow 3y ago
  That part isn't what they were talking about, they were just talking about the practice of not responding at the LLM level

panarky 3y ago

Do you have examples of facts that LLama 2 provides that are censored on GPT-4?