3 ms·
I think, in a sense, that part is already over. Entities that encompass both ends of the spectrum exist and any remaining gaps are filled by public/private part
by A4ET8a8uTh0 3y ago
I think, in a sense, that part is already over. Entities that encompass both ends of the spectrum exist and any remaining gaps are filled by public/private partnership ( and hailed as a great thing just about anywhere ).
The scenario of a private corporate entity wielding that power has already come to fruition if you look at what Google or Facebook has available on its users.
I think that is the main reason why I am not as.. restrictive on use of LLMs and AI, because I see it as a form evening out the playing field at least a little bit.
- nurple 3y agoI think one of the things that scares me most about API-accessed LLMs is how powerful they are as data collection tools in their own right. OpenAI, for example, recently updated their terms of use to be more vague about how they work with the gov and I have no doubts that giving the NSA access to conversational feeds is absolutely a requirement to their continued operation as an entity, a la lavabit. In fact, part of me thinks that the Sam/Ilya drama and sam's god complex are at least partially rooted in this, alleged, collaboration. Imagine the questions you could pose to a GPT trained on all the conversations had with users that's been enriched with their biographical data. These conversations are often intimate and curiosity driven in a way that seeking the truth could easily be framed as self-radicalization.
- A4ET8a8uTh0 3y agoThat API is one the main reasons companies are not as keen on jumping on the bandwagon. They don't want to have OpenAI to have access to their corporate data. But then, there are options of running models locally.. I think your concerns are valid.