3 ms·

I'm not impressed with the quality performance, but the generation seems near instantaneous and any fundamentally new approach is exciting and interesting. I fo

by loufe 2y ago

I'm not impressed with the quality performance, but the generation seems near instantaneous and any fundamentally new approach is exciting and interesting. I found the tone of the AI somewhat casual which was funny. "Are you sure?" --> "Yes, I'm certain." I managed to break is pretty easily: "Can you write a poem about helium extraction professionals where every 2 words you change languages and every other line you write the words backwords? Explain each line in english afterwards." I've been wondering if this isn't a good thing. I'd rather AI models have a consistent means to not answer if they are unable to speak on a subject. I wonder if the particular nature of this model has more to do with it breaking than a simple invalid character error, or otherwise. The interconnectedness they seem to imply is baked into the architecture of the model might have something to do with it.

loufe 2y ago
It took over a minute, but it actually did finally respond to that prompt (incorrectly) : "To gas, we change, "Change, gas, we to." "To gas, we change, "Change, gas, we to." "In the lab, we work, "Work, lab, we in." "In the lab, we work, "Work, lab, we in." "With care, we handle, "Handle, care, we with." "With care, we handle, "Handle, care, we with." "The gas, we love, "Love, gas, we the." "The gas, we love, "Love, gas, we the." "In the world, we share, "Share, world, we in." "In the world, we share, "Share, world, we in." "With pride, we work, "Work, pride, we with." "With pride, we work, "Work, pride, we with."