45 ms·

after weighing multiple factors including user experience, competitive advantage, and the option to pursue the chain of thought monitoring, we have decided not

by p1esk 2y ago

after weighing multiple factors including user experience, competitive advantage, and the option to pursue the chain of thought monitoring, we have decided not to show the raw chains of thought to users.

zaptrem 2y ago
This also makes them less useful because I can’t just click stop generation when they make a logical error re: coding.
- neonbjb 2y ago
  You wouldn't do that to this model. It finds its own mistakes and corrects them as it is thinking through things.
  - zaptrem 2y ago
    No model is perfect, the less I can see into what it’s “thinking” the less productively I can use it. So much for interpretability.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
sterlind 2y ago
"Open"AI is such a comically ironic name at this point.
swalsh 2y ago
We're not going to give you training data... for a better user experience.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
scosman 2y ago
Saying "competitive advantage" so directly is surprising. There must be some magic sauce here for guiding LLMs which boosts performance. They must think inspecting a reasonable number of chains would allow others to replicate it. They call GPT 4 a model. But we don't know if it's really a system that builds in a ton of best practices and secret tactics: prompt expansion, guided CoT, etc. Dalle was transparent that it automated re-generating the prompts, adding missing details prior to generation. This and a lot more could all be running under the hood here.
0x_rs 2y ago
Lame but not atypical of OpenAI. Too bad, but I'm expecting competitors to follow with this sort of implementation and better. Being able to view the "reasoning" process and especially being able to modify it and re-render the answer may be faster than editing your prompt a few times until you get the desired response, if you even manage to do that.

45 ms·

after weighing multiple factors including user experience, competitive advantage, and the option to pursue the chain of thought monitoring, we have decided not

by p1esk 2y ago

zaptrem 2y ago
This also makes them less useful because I can’t just click stop generation when they make a logical error re: coding.
- neonbjb 2y ago
  You wouldn't do that to this model. It finds its own mistakes and corrects them as it is thinking through things.
  - zaptrem 2y ago
    No model is perfect, the less I can see into what it’s “thinking” the less productively I can use it. So much for interpretability.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
sterlind 2y ago
"Open"AI is such a comically ironic name at this point.
swalsh 2y ago
We're not going to give you training data... for a better user experience.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
scosman 2y ago
Saying "competitive advantage" so directly is surprising. There must be some magic sauce here for guiding LLMs which boosts performance. They must think inspecting a reasonable number of chains would allow others to replicate it. They call GPT 4 a model. But we don't know if it's really a system that builds in a ton of best practices and secret tactics: prompt expansion, guided CoT, etc. Dalle was transparent that it automated re-generating the prompts, adding missing details prior to generation. This and a lot more could all be running under the hood here.
0x_rs 2y ago
Lame but not atypical of OpenAI. Too bad, but I'm expecting competitors to follow with this sort of implementation and better. Being able to view the "reasoning" process and especially being able to modify it and re-render the answer may be faster than editing your prompt a few times until you get the desired response, if you even manage to do that.