4 ms·

This is some serious revisionist history. GPT-2 wasn't instruction-following or even conversational.

by valleyer 6mo ago

patrickmcnamara 6mo ago
Hyperbole.
- jdiff 6mo ago
  It's really not. It was a fun toy but had very little utility. It could generate plausible looking text that collapsed immediately upon any amount of inspection or even just attention. Code generation wasn't even a twinkle in Altman's eye scanning orbs at that point.
  - tomalbrc 6mo ago
    Talking about revisionist…
  - smoghat 6mo ago
    But like Mythos, it was too dangerous to release. https://slate.com/technology/2019/02/openai-gpt2-text-generating-algorithm-ai-dangerous.html https://slate.com/technology/2019/02/openai-gpt2-text-genera...
    - wongarsu 6mo ago
      And the "too dangerous to release" capability was writing somewhat plausible news articles based on a headline or handwritten beginning of an article. In the same style as what you had written Today we call that "advanced autocomplete", but at the time OpenAI managed to generate a lot of hype about how this would lead to an unstoppable flood of disinformation if they allowed the wrong people access to this dangerous tool. Even the original gpt3 was still behind waitlists with manual approval
      - someguyiguess 6mo ago
        And as it turns out, they were correct.
  - kube-system 6mo ago
    I think you misunderstand the comment you replied to. They are saying the above comment was a rhetorical exaggeration of GPT-2's capabilities as a commentary on how low quality Samsung TV software is. They don't actually think GPT-2 was very capable. It is a figure of speech, not a literal statement.
- valleyer 6mo ago
  If so, I apologize.
endymion-light 6mo ago
it's a joke about the quality of samsung tv's rather than a serious comment - i should have said a perceptron could hack a samsung tv
- valleyer 6mo ago
  Fair enough, sorry :)
michaelcampbell 6mo ago
And yet Dario in his OpenAI days was proclaiming it too scary to be released. Now why does that sound familiar...?

This is some serious revisionist history. GPT-2 wasn't instruction-following or even conversational.

patrickmcnamara 6mo ago

Hyperbole.

jdiff 6mo ago
It's really not. It was a fun toy but had very little utility. It could generate plausible looking text that collapsed immediately upon any amount of inspection or even just attention. Code generation wasn't even a twinkle in Altman's eye scanning orbs at that point.
- tomalbrc 6mo ago
  Talking about revisionist…
- smoghat 6mo ago
  But like Mythos, it was too dangerous to release. https://slate.com/technology/2019/02/openai-gpt2-text-generating-algorithm-ai-dangerous.html https://slate.com/technology/2019/02/openai-gpt2-text-genera...
  - wongarsu 6mo ago
    And the "too dangerous to release" capability was writing somewhat plausible news articles based on a headline or handwritten beginning of an article. In the same style as what you had written Today we call that "advanced autocomplete", but at the time OpenAI managed to generate a lot of hype about how this would lead to an unstoppable flood of disinformation if they allowed the wrong people access to this dangerous tool. Even the original gpt3 was still behind waitlists with manual approval
    - someguyiguess 6mo ago
      And as it turns out, they were correct.
- kube-system 6mo ago
  I think you misunderstand the comment you replied to. They are saying the above comment was a rhetorical exaggeration of GPT-2's capabilities as a commentary on how low quality Samsung TV software is. They don't actually think GPT-2 was very capable. It is a figure of speech, not a literal statement.
valleyer 6mo ago
If so, I apologize.

endymion-light 6mo ago

it's a joke about the quality of samsung tv's rather than a serious comment - i should have said a perceptron could hack a samsung tv

valleyer 6mo ago
Fair enough, sorry :)

michaelcampbell 6mo ago

And yet Dario in his OpenAI days was proclaiming it too scary to be released. Now why does that sound familiar...?