[HN Gopher] OpenAssistant Conversations - Democratizing Large La...
___________________________________________________________________
OpenAssistant Conversations - Democratizing Large Language Model
Alignment [pdf]
Author : pps
Score : 130 points
Date : 2023-04-15 17:04 UTC (5 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.ykilcher.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.ykilcher.com)
| donfuzius wrote:
| It's awesome that the OpenAssistant project made it this far with
| a lot of crowed-sourced input. Congrats to the whole team that
| works really hard trying to create a truly open LLM.
|
| One thing that puzzles me though, is that for the GPT-3.5
| comparison, the model used is trained using both OpenAssistant
| and alpaca data, which is not free due to the OpenAI license used
| to generate the data. Isn't that defeating the purpose?
|
| "... Completions were generated using pythia-12b-deduped fine-
| tuned on the OpenAssistant and Alpaca [9] dataset as well as
| gpt-3.5-turbo using the OpenAI API..."
| saranormous wrote:
| this is awesome. is there good research explaining methodology of
| feedback collection/desired dataset (beyond just relative human
| preference?)
| kalium-xyz wrote:
| Awesome how they shaped the authors their names into a heart
| frog59059 wrote:
| really excited!
| visarga wrote:
| This makes Turbo GPT 3.5 level AI free, private and finetuneable.
| OpenAI exclusivity shrinks now to GPT-4. That's why I don't think
| they will be able to keep a large market share in LLMs, any level
| of AI is going to get open and free soon. SOTA models are also
| easy to distill by API, very hard to defend against using chat
| logs as training data for other models.
|
| Once we all got one running, maybe in the OS, maybe in the
| browser, or as a separate app, then I see bad days ahead for
| online advertising. Ads are simply omitted when the bot solves a
| specific task for the user. We got infinitely tuneable and
| efficient filters for everything that gets in front of our eyes,
| and we will need these AI assistants to fight back the onslaught
| of AI spam bots. We can make the internet a beautiful garden
| again if we control the filters and the UI.
| armchairhacker wrote:
| The problem is that for-profit businesses like OpenAI have more
| money and compute than even millions of volunteers. I
| definitely believe we'll get an open GPT-4 eventually, but by
| then OpenAI will have GPT-5, and so on.
|
| It's a shame really: the ultimate cause is the massive amount
| of wealth inequality we have today. If private entities and
| governments didn't have so much resources compared to
| individuals, I'm certain an open-source AI would be the
| biggest, because open-source has intrinsic benefits over
| closed-source: you have many people all working on the same
| project vs. multiple siloed groups, and anyone not affiliated
| with the private service is biased to use and support the open
| one. This is why the best operating systems, programming
| languages, and other software are all open-source: more money
| != better software, you don't need money to build software as
| much as you need intelligence and work ethic. But with AI, the
| #1 limiting factor is web-scraping required to get all of the
| data, and GPUs to train a model with it (maybe also money to
| pay Mechanical-Turk workers for simple classification; but
| perhaps enough volunteers could beat this, plus it seems like
| unskilled classification is becoming less important since the
| models can do this on their own).
|
| That's not to say open-source AI won't be great, and I also
| think most places will use it. Especially if OpenAI is too
| expensive and/or disallows what they are trying to do. It does
| put pressure on OpenAI to be more lenient with pricing and
| acceptable use, and also to keep improving. But unless we
| address the massive wealth inequality, which is why LAION has
| substantially less funding than not just OpenAI but also some
| of the other startups, it's going to always lag behind.
| pleasantpeasant wrote:
| Won't open-source AIs have their code stolen by the private
| AIs? There's no one stopping open-source AIs being used
| within private AIs.
| huijzer wrote:
| Although FOSS is great, extreme wealth inequality has to be
| fixed by the government and not by open source developers.
| KolmogorovComp wrote:
| Side question, but how do these models are benchmarked, and how
| is this subfield evolving these days? I have seen many papers
| relying on standard student tests performance, but they don't
| seem very accurate since LLAMA-based models perform almost as
| good as chatGPT (3/3.5) despite being apparently being an order
| of magnitude worse in practice.
| pleasantpeasant wrote:
| I can't wait for an ad companies to force you to watch a 10
| second video ad before it gives you a result for your query.
|
| It's only a matter of time before these AI companies start
| pairing up with ad companies(if they already haven't). Google
| could easily put ad videos every 10 queries or something. You
| already see these limited free tokens/credits/querie on AI art
| sites.
|
| How long until they put some ads in-between queries?
| kmod wrote:
| Do you have any evidence that this is GPT-3.5 level, or are you
| just repeating what they said? We have an abundance of claimed
| capabilities already; that's not what's lacking.
| bugglebeetle wrote:
| I tried a few prompts I use in production stuff and it failed
| on all of them and hallucinated quite a bit more. All of
| these models are optimized for the gimmicky chatbot stuff
| that seems impressive to a casual user, but not for
| comparable capabilities to GPT-3.5. I wish what the parent
| said was true because it would save me money!
| akiselev wrote:
| Which open model comes closest to GPT-3.5 in your
| production workload, if you don't mind me asking?
| bugglebeetle wrote:
| None of them really, because I use complex prompts with
| task breakdowns that no other models beside OpenAI's seem
| capable of processing. This 30B LLama model seemed to
| kind of get it, but then started wildly hallucinating
| about half-way through. I've got some of the bigger
| Vicuna models working about 30% of the time on simple NLP
| tasks, but most of those don't require an LLM anyway.
| They might perform better if you fine-tune them for
| whatever particular job, but that kind of defeats the
| purpose. The advantage of LLMs is supposed to be their
| generalized capabilities.
| WhatIsDukkha wrote:
| Section E of the paper we are "discussing" here.
| skilled wrote:
| What beautiful garden? Are you completely ignoring the fact
| that OpenAI is made possible because it scraped the entire Web
| (the actual garden) and made a query index out of it?
|
| Do you not have any respect for people who actually spent their
| time and creativity to provide the information necessary for
| this model to even work?
|
| Ignorance is bliss I guess.
| sebzim4500 wrote:
| >Do you not have any respect for people who actually spent
| their time and creativity to provide the information
| necessary for this model to even work?
|
| We all stand on the shoulders of giants, the authors of this
| content did not grow up in a concrete box isolated from the
| works of earlier generations.
| boredemployee wrote:
| >> Do you not have any respect for people who actually spent
| their time and creativity to provide the information
| necessary for this model to even work?
|
| The worrying is legit and cute but let's face that at this
| moment no one is giving a f.
|
| All we see are people worried that all the AI agents will
| take their jobs and/or how to make money out of that.
| skilled wrote:
| You're right. I myself don't care either, but not because I
| don't understand how it happened. I don't because there is
| nothing I can say or do that would make OpenAI suddenly
| change their direction.
| scubbo wrote:
| > Do you not have any respect for people who actually spent
| their time and creativity to provide the information
| necessary for this model to even work?
|
| Yes, which is why I'm delighted to be able to filter out the
| advertizing spam that subhuman scum traffic alongside the
| outputs of creativity.
| zmnd wrote:
| Out of curiosity, do you use ad blocking software?
| syrusakbary wrote:
| Here's the website they just launched, in case it's useful for
| anyone:
|
| https://open-assistant.io/
| machinelearning wrote:
| If you're trying to use this and don't get the sign up email,
| check your spam folder. Gmail seems to auto-categorize the email
| as spam
| marcodiego wrote:
| And... Where is the data?
|
| EDIT: trying it now with model "OA_SFT_Llama_30B_6". It is FAR
| worse than ChatGPT.
| KaoruAoiShiho wrote:
| What is the token limit? The 2k limit on llama is *very limiting
| on the number of things it can do.
| pps wrote:
| Video about the release:
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ddG2fM9i4Kk
| TOMDM wrote:
| This is the same Pythia and Llama based models right?
|
| If so, they certainly aren't ChatGPT level in their quality.
| Impressive, potentially useful, but not ChatGPT.
|
| Still an incredible effort, the RLHF data here might eventually
| make an Open Source ChatGPT possible, but these models are not
| that.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2023-04-15 23:00 UTC)