[HN Gopher] Microsoft's paper on OpenAI's GPT-4 had hidden infor...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Microsoft's paper on OpenAI's GPT-4 had hidden information
        
       Author : georgehill
       Score  : 100 points
       Date   : 2023-03-23 21:26 UTC (1 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (twitter.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (twitter.com)
        
       | psychphysic wrote:
       | Every so often, very rarely, I end up wanting to read some
       | twitter content.
       | 
       | And I realise how agonisingly painful twitter threads are to
       | consume.
       | 
       | It's just as bad as those YOU WONT BELIEVE WHERE THOSE CELEBS ARE
       | NOW. Where you had to click next one by one.
        
         | [deleted]
        
         | switch007 wrote:
         | * * *
        
       | buildbot wrote:
       | Err wow, they left all the (very weird) comments in looking at
       | the source. Our group always makes sure to strip the comments.
        
       | kgeist wrote:
       | Interesting that it was originally called DV3 in the paper -
       | looks similar to the name of the existing, older "davinci-003"
       | model, which powered GPT-3
        
         | AgentME wrote:
         | Maybe they planned to use the davinci-003 name for it
         | originally, but then when GPT-4 took longer to make than they
         | expected and a new revision GPT-3 came out first, they
         | reallocated the name to that.
        
         | zamnos wrote:
         | More interestingly, "Davinci 3" is mentioned as an author of
         | unknown affiliation. Which, if it's referring to them having
         | using davinci-003 to help author the paper would be
         | interesting. It having unknown affiliation would but a) true
         | and b) hilarious.
        
       | mudlus wrote:
       | [flagged]
        
       | goodgoblin wrote:
       | The spontaneous toxic content stuff is a little alarming, but
       | probably in the future there will be gpt-Ns that have their core
       | training data filtered so all the insane reddit comments aren't
       | part of their makeup.
        
         | GaggiX wrote:
         | If you filter the dataset to remove everything that can be
         | considered toxic than the model will have a much hard time
         | understanding humanity as a whole, the solution is alignment
         | not censorship.
        
           | thrown123098 wrote:
           | [flagged]
        
           | ben_w wrote:
           | While I share your belief, I am unaware of any proof that
           | such censorship would actually fail as an alignment method.
           | 
           | Nor even how much impact it would have on capabilities.
           | 
           | Of course, to actually function this would also need to e.g.
           | filter out soap operas, murder mysteries, and action films,
           | lest it overestimate the frequency and underestimate the
           | impact of homicide.
        
           | MikeTheGreat wrote:
           | Genuine question: What do you mean by 'alignment'? Is this a
           | technique for training AIs, or a philosophy about how to
           | approach this, etc?
           | 
           | I've never heard the term before and would love any pointers
           | (including enough keywords to Google for it :) )
        
             | GaggiX wrote:
             | https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/AI_alignment
             | 
             | "In the field of artificial intelligence (AI), AI alignment
             | research aims to steer AI systems towards their designers'
             | intended goals and interests."
             | 
             | I also suggest the YouTube channel: "Robert Miles"
        
         | GenerocUsername wrote:
         | OpenAI has incentive to 'accidentally' allow toxic content
         | through, so when they make the case that all models should be
         | censored and make it safe, they can pull up the ladder behind
         | them.
        
       | xnx wrote:
       | I was prepared to be very amused if this was the result of
       | Windows screenshot tool acropalypse.
        
       | withinboredom wrote:
       | Sigh. What an idiot (no offense). Why tell the world you got this
       | from the comments? Now every damn researcher is going to strip
       | them out and for those of us who knew to look for them, take away
       | our fun.
       | 
       | Never. Ever. Reveal your sources.
        
         | albertzeyer wrote:
         | This is already known. Google and DeepMind usually strip the
         | comments out.
        
         | deely3 wrote:
         | Correct me if Im wrong, but.. are you defending closed source
         | and restriction of information?
        
         | zamnos wrote:
         | It may shock you to hear, but some people go onto _our_
         | Internet, and just tell lies! Preposterous, I know. But that
         | means that only really works if you 're a reporter. If you're
         | some rando on twitter, random unverified claims on twitter are
         | hearsay and rumor. Whats the use of some Twitter account going
         | "Microsoft didn't know GPT-4 was multi-modal and could do
         | images as well as text"? Or "Even Microsoft doesn't know how
         | expensive it was to train GPT-4"? If you're seeking fame beyond
         | a closed Slack group, you're gonna need to back up your claims.
        
       | max_expectation wrote:
       | There is a tool my supervisor always used to make me use to avoid
       | this when posting to ArXiv: https://github.com/google-
       | research/arxiv-latex-cleaner
        
       | kodah wrote:
       | Interesting that they note the power consumption and climate
       | change impact. I believe there's a long list of folks who said
       | this wasn't the case weeks ago.
        
         | thrown123098 wrote:
         | My fart has an impact on climate change too. Doesn't mean it's
         | meaningful. Same for these models.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2023-03-23 23:00 UTC)