3 ms·

when asked the reason, ChatGPT had this to say- "Actually, the choice of “Elara” wasn’t a result of training on specific copyrighted stories or any prompt to av

when asked the reason, ChatGPT had this to say- "Actually, the choice of “Elara” wasn’t a result of training on specific copyrighted stories or any prompt to avoid copyright claims. OpenAI models like me are designed to create original content without directly referencing copyrighted characters, and "Elara" is simply a popular-sounding name in many storytelling contexts. I just used it consistently for its versatility, but I’m totally open to switching things up!"

arka2147483647 2y ago
Why do people write these kinds of "answers" that the model gives. It's not like the model knows why it's doing anything.
- taytus 2y ago
  Not understanding how LLMs work.
  - padheyam 2y ago
    Ah such condescension! I was careful not to provide an opinion, but replicate the answer as is. The intent was not to treat that answer as fact; but I thought that response was pretty revealing and in fact supported the parent comment on LLMs having been trained on copyrighted materials. The response chatgpt provided was that OpenAI models are designed to create original content "without directly referencing copyrighted characters". If it was creating original content it needn't have referred to the constraint with respect to avoiding directly referencing the copyrighted characters.
dTal 2y ago
ChatGPT's opinion on the matter is completely worthless, unless it was also trained on an accurate description of its training process (it wasn't). Language models do not even have access to their own "thought process" - if you ask it "why" it said something, you will get a post-hoc rationalization 100 percent of the time because the next-word prediction only has access to the same text that you see. The rationalization might be incidentally correct, or it might not - either way it contributes no real information about the model's internal state.
- jiggawatts 2y ago
  There's an interesting theory that this is all that consciousness is: one part of the brain trying to explain the decisions of another part, a part into which it has no special insight.
  - krapp 2y ago
    That interesting theory is called the bicameral mind, and as far as I know it's widely considered pseudoscience and not taken seriously in any scientific field. Also, it doesn't describe at all the way LLMs work, so it isn't even applicable.
- unparagoned 2y ago
  So just like humans
  - krapp 2y ago
    No, not like humans. Humans have access to their own thought processes, and are capable of introspection.

arka2147483647 2y ago

Why do people write these kinds of "answers" that the model gives. It's not like the model knows why it's doing anything.

taytus 2y ago
Not understanding how LLMs work.
- padheyam 2y ago
  Ah such condescension! I was careful not to provide an opinion, but replicate the answer as is. The intent was not to treat that answer as fact; but I thought that response was pretty revealing and in fact supported the parent comment on LLMs having been trained on copyrighted materials. The response chatgpt provided was that OpenAI models are designed to create original content "without directly referencing copyrighted characters". If it was creating original content it needn't have referred to the constraint with respect to avoiding directly referencing the copyrighted characters.

dTal 2y ago

ChatGPT's opinion on the matter is completely worthless, unless it was also trained on an accurate description of its training process (it wasn't). Language models do not even have access to their own "thought process" - if you ask it "why" it said something, you will get a post-hoc rationalization 100 percent of the time because the next-word prediction only has access to the same text that you see. The rationalization might be incidentally correct, or it might not - either way it contributes no real information about the model's internal state.

jiggawatts 2y ago
There's an interesting theory that this is all that consciousness is: one part of the brain trying to explain the decisions of another part, a part into which it has no special insight.
- krapp 2y ago
  That interesting theory is called the bicameral mind, and as far as I know it's widely considered pseudoscience and not taken seriously in any scientific field. Also, it doesn't describe at all the way LLMs work, so it isn't even applicable.
unparagoned 2y ago
So just like humans
- krapp 2y ago
  No, not like humans. Humans have access to their own thought processes, and are capable of introspection.