[HN Gopher] Ask HN: Best Alternatives to OpenAI ChatGPT?
___________________________________________________________________
Ask HN: Best Alternatives to OpenAI ChatGPT?
With the last days exposure of OpenAIs bow down to being a for
profit company (imo) I would like to hear what else I can use for
chatting with an assistant just as good as chatgpt? Anything as
good ?
Author : danielovichdk
Score : 33 points
Date : 2023-11-22 20:43 UTC (2 hours ago)
| huytersd wrote:
| Nothing is as good. Bard is quite good but not the same.
| spullara wrote:
| Azure OpenAI GPT-4
| taraparo wrote:
| you.com
| SeanAnderson wrote:
| I just asked YouChat which LLM powers it and it responded by
| saying OpenAI's GPT3.
| SeanAnderson wrote:
| Not really, no. The whole reason the fiasco occurred in the first
| place is because it's in a league of its own.
|
| Bard and Claude are likely to be suggested, but the competency
| gap is palpable. I've tried using them and failed to find them
| sufficiently compelling to adopt into my workflow for programming
| tasks.
| redeux wrote:
| I've found Anthropic's Claud v2 quite good as a general purpose
| LLM assistant at a variety of tasks, including code generation
| and ideation.
|
| You can find it from Anthropic directly[1] or access it through
| AWS Bedrock[2]. The latter is how I gained access.
|
| 1. https://claude.ai/
|
| 2. https://aws.amazon.com/bedrock/
| nickthegreek wrote:
| If you were using GPT-4 before, then nothing else is going to
| match it. If you were only using the free version, then you might
| be able to get by the main competition.
| intellectronica wrote:
| Microsoft Copilot / Bing runs on GPT-4. For free.
| aluminum96 wrote:
| Bing's RLHF is a mess compared to ChatGPT. Hopefully they can
| improve it, but the instruction following leaves something to
| be desired.
| intellectronica wrote:
| Not true. It's the same model (AFAIK). Maybe the system
| prompt is different. But generally you can get the same
| performance and behaviour from it.
| brycewray wrote:
| Me to Bing in Edge: "Copilot, are you running on GPT-4?"
|
| Bing: "Hello! This is Bing. I'm sorry, but I'm not
| Copilot. I'm a chat mode of Microsoft Bing. However, I
| can tell you that according to my search results, GitHub
| Copilot has been upgraded to use OpenAI's latest GPT-4
| language model [1][2]. It is now more powerful and offers
| more accurate code suggestions and explanations[1]."
|
| (Footnotes provided by the AI.)
|
| [1]:
| https://github.blog/2023-11-08-universe-2023-copilot-
| transfo...
|
| [2]: https://www.pcmag.com/news/microsoft-uses-gpt-4-to-
| turn-gith...
| WendyTheWillow wrote:
| What happened _in the last few days_ that changed your opinion of
| how OpenAI was operating? Surely you didn't previously think the
| board of the non-profit had, until that point, constrained in any
| way the development of ChatGPT...
| leumassuehtam wrote:
| You will not find anything as good as the paid version of
| ChatGPT. You might try Phind [0].
|
| [0] https://www.phind.com/
| intellectronica wrote:
| https://copilot.microsoft.com/
| Arson9416 wrote:
| As others have mentioned, it's not there yet.
|
| One good thing we can hope to expect from the OpenAI drama is
| that it is now _very_ clear that we need truly open and powerful
| models. A new generation of startups can 't be bottlenecked so
| critically on a single service. Hopefully OpenAI employees see
| this as well and do what they can to help decentralize generative
| AI.
| jes5199 wrote:
| to second this, I really want an LLM that can call a REST API
| like ChatGPT plugins can. What is out there?
|
| for this use case, it might be okay if it's not as intelligent as
| GPT 4
| grepfru_it wrote:
| I have used llama2 to do something like this. I build a prompt
| with a set of opcodes, the llm responds with an opcode and an
| external system handles the call. Not sure if that is what you
| are looking for however
| dragonwriter wrote:
| > to second this, I really want an LLM that can call a REST API
| like ChatGPT plugins can. What is out there?
|
| That's not really a model feature but a prompting + toolchain
| feature. Conceptually, there's no reason you couldn't build a
| parser for the chatGPT plugin description json, the
| descriptions of existing plugins, and prompt any model wrapped
| in a tool-using framework to call them. That's all outside of
| the model itself.
| ai_g0rl wrote:
| Try Perplexity AI: https://www.perplexity.ai/
| SeanAnderson wrote:
| I asked Perplexity which LLM powers it and it said OpenAI
| GPT-3.
| oceanplexian wrote:
| That doesn't mean anything. I have some fine tunes of Llama
| that will claim they are GPT-3 all day long. Models have no
| concept of an identity.
| SeanAnderson wrote:
| Eh, disagree. It means a lot. It's either hallucinating on
| a trivial use case or it's correct and not useful to OP.
| One of the seed prompts for GPT establishes what it is. I
| would find it odd if other, commercialized LLMs don't do
| the same since any sane PM would say "Wow, this
| hallucination is absolutely terrible for marketing
| ourselves. Fix it."
|
| That said, https://blog.perplexity.ai/technical-faq/what-
| models-does-co... -- it's powered by OpenAI's GPT.
| simonhughes22 wrote:
| Llama 2 (and variants). Has the lowest hallucination rate
| (https://github.com/vectara/hallucination-leaderboard), and its
| open source and so we know what went into it, and the community
| can improve it
| Gys wrote:
| So in your opinion being for profit is bad?
|
| Interesting.
|
| Specifically on OAI there were several threads here before
| discussing how much money it was loosing and if they might not
| make it.
| tomohelix wrote:
| For coding and "reasoning" tasks, there isn't any that can match
| GPT4. You can try Bing but it is slightly nerfed in my
| experience.
|
| For general writing, simple discussion, basic knowledge etc,
| Claude is pretty good. In fact, I find Claude's writing a lot
| better than GPT. It sounds more "normal".
|
| For vision and API calls and developing apps and such,
| unfortunately, GPT is king and anything else pales in comparison.
| summerlight wrote:
| Claude is useful. Bard seems good enough but for more serious
| usages you probably want to wait for Gemini.
| williamstein wrote:
| Phind.com's custom model (which is I think publicly available) is
| pretty good for coding tasks. It helps enormously that it uses
| RAG with web search. I use it all the time and also GPT-4, and
| GPT-4 is better, but Phind's model is close and also very fast. I
| have nothing to do with the company, and am just a random (free)
| user.
| cellis wrote:
| No. But that holds especially true for subtle edge cases, rather
| than the general case. You might be able to get answers to
| "common" or "simple" questions just as well using Mistral7B or
| Llama 2 13B.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2023-11-22 23:02 UTC)