4 ms·

If they use Twitter data does grok answer with a 280 character text? Additional Twitter data is in my eyes mostly low quality content, that's nothing I would

by 0x073 2y ago

If they use Twitter data does grok answer with a 280 character text? Additional Twitter data is in my eyes mostly low quality content, that's nothing I would want in a AI model.

tgsovlerkhgsel 2y ago
> If they use Twitter data does grok answer with a 280 character text? That may be considered a feature. ChatGPT seems reasonably concise, Gemini's answers tend to be verbose (without adding meaningful content).
- _flux 2y ago
  I've lead myself to believe that long responses are actually beneficial for the quality of the responses, as processing and producing tokens are the only time when LLMs get to "think". In particular, requesting an analysis of the problem first before jumping to conclusions can be more effective than just asking for the final answer directly. However, this analysis phase, or similar one, could just be done hidden in the background, but I don't think any are doing that yet. From the user point of view that would be just waiting, and from API point of view those tokens would also cost. Might just as well entertain the user with the text it processes in the meanwhile.
  - seanhunter 2y ago
    My understanding is this used to be the case[1] but isn't really true any longer due to things like the "star" method for model training[2]. Empirically it absolutely (circa GPT3) used to be the case that if you prompted with "Explain all your reasoning step by step and then give the answer at the end" or similar it would give you a better answer for a complex question than if you said "Just give me the answer and nothing else" or similar, or asked for the answer first, and then circa gpt-4 answers started getting much longer even if you asked the model to be concise. That doesn't seem to be the case any more and there has been speculation this is down to the star method being used for training newer models. I say speculation because I don't believe people have come out and said they are using star for training. OpenAI referred to Q* somewhere but they wouldn't be drawn on whether that * is this "star" and although google were involved in publishing the star paper they haven't said gemini uses it (I don't think). [1] https://arxiv.org/abs/2201.11903 https://arxiv.org/abs/2201.11903 [2] https://arxiv.org/pdf/2203.14465 https://arxiv.org/pdf/2203.14465
_imnothere 2y ago
> low quality content How does it matter even if the quality is high or low? The point is user data was used without consent.
- 0x073 2y ago
  Yes, but nothing new, other AI models used data that they don't own. Makes it not better, but I think thats the path.

by 0x073 2y ago

If they use Twitter data does grok answer with a 280 character text? Additional Twitter data is in my eyes mostly low quality content, that's nothing I would want in a AI model.

tgsovlerkhgsel 2y ago

> If they use Twitter data does grok answer with a 280 character text? That may be considered a feature. ChatGPT seems reasonably concise, Gemini's answers tend to be verbose (without adding meaningful content).

_flux 2y ago
I've lead myself to believe that long responses are actually beneficial for the quality of the responses, as processing and producing tokens are the only time when LLMs get to "think". In particular, requesting an analysis of the problem first before jumping to conclusions can be more effective than just asking for the final answer directly. However, this analysis phase, or similar one, could just be done hidden in the background, but I don't think any are doing that yet. From the user point of view that would be just waiting, and from API point of view those tokens would also cost. Might just as well entertain the user with the text it processes in the meanwhile.
- seanhunter 2y ago
  My understanding is this used to be the case[1] but isn't really true any longer due to things like the "star" method for model training[2]. Empirically it absolutely (circa GPT3) used to be the case that if you prompted with "Explain all your reasoning step by step and then give the answer at the end" or similar it would give you a better answer for a complex question than if you said "Just give me the answer and nothing else" or similar, or asked for the answer first, and then circa gpt-4 answers started getting much longer even if you asked the model to be concise. That doesn't seem to be the case any more and there has been speculation this is down to the star method being used for training newer models. I say speculation because I don't believe people have come out and said they are using star for training. OpenAI referred to Q* somewhere but they wouldn't be drawn on whether that * is this "star" and although google were involved in publishing the star paper they haven't said gemini uses it (I don't think). [1] https://arxiv.org/abs/2201.11903 https://arxiv.org/abs/2201.11903 [2] https://arxiv.org/pdf/2203.14465 https://arxiv.org/pdf/2203.14465

_imnothere 2y ago

> low quality content How does it matter even if the quality is high or low? The point is user data was used without consent.

0x073 2y ago
Yes, but nothing new, other AI models used data that they don't own. Makes it not better, but I think thats the path.