OpenAI News & Discussions

[wjfox]

[spryfusion]

[ººº]

Damn.

You asked this? If so, then I will seriously consider joining.

[wjfox]

[wjfox]

[wjfox]

You asked this? If so, then I will seriously consider joining.

Not my image - somebody else posted it.

[Miky617]

I find it a little surprising that it scored relatively poorly on the AP English Literature exam as well as the AP English Language exam, given that language and composition are its strong suits. Maybe for the literature exam it didn't have many of the test's books represented in its training data, but I also find that hard to believe since many of them are well-known classics. It's been a while since I took the AP Lit exam but from what I remember, that exam focused heavily on interpreting literature passages abstractly and drawing analogies, inferring author intent, tone, etc. Seems like there's still room to grow

[weatheriscool]

GPT-4 Has the Memory of a Goldfish (The Atlantic)
https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/ ... ow/673426/
Archive page at https://archive.ph/fsh6b[quote]

By this point, the many defects of AI-based language models have been analyzed to death—their incorrigible dishonesty, their capacity for bias and bigotry, their lack of common sense. GPT-4, the newest and most advanced such model yet, is already being subjected to the same scrutiny, and it still seems to misfire in pretty much all the ways earlier models did. But large language models have another shortcoming that has so far gotten relatively little attention: their shoddy recall. These multibillion-dollar programs, which require several city blocks’ worth of energy to run, may now be able to code websites, plan vacations, and draft company-wide emails in the style of William Faulkner. But they have the memory of a goldfish.

-snip-

The trouble is that ChatGPT’s memory—and the memory of large language models more generally—is terrible. Each time a model generates a response, it can take into account only a limited amount of text, known as the model’s context window. ChatGPT has a context window of roughly 4,000 words—long enough that the average person messing around with it might never notice but short enough to render all sorts of complex tasks impossible. For instance, it wouldn’t be able to summarize a book, review a major coding project, or search your Google Drive. (Technically, context windows are measured not in words but in tokens, a distinction that becomes more important when you’re dealing with both visual and linguistic inputs.)

-snip-

GPT-4 still can’t retain information from one session to the next. Engineers could make the context window two times or three times or 100 times bigger, and this would still be the case: Each time you started a new conversation with GPT-4, you’d be starting from scratch. When booted up, it is born anew. (Doesn’t sound like a very good therapist.)

But even without solving this deeper problem of long-term memory, just lengthening the context window is no easy thing. As the engineers extend it, Millière told me, the computation power required to run the language model—and thus its cost of operation—increases exponentially. A machine’s total memory capacity is also a constraint, according to Alex Dimakis, a computer scientist at the University of Texas at Austin and a co-director of the Institute for Foundations of Machine Learning. No single computer that exists today, he told me, could support, say, a million-word context window.

-snip-[/quote]

[lechwall]

GPT-4 Has the Memory of a Goldfish (The Atlantic)
https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/ ... ow/673426/
Archive page at https://archive.ph/fsh6b[quote]

By this point, the many defects of AI-based language models have been analyzed to death—their incorrigible dishonesty, their capacity for bias and bigotry, their lack of common sense. GPT-4, the newest and most advanced such model yet, is already being subjected to the same scrutiny, and it still seems to misfire in pretty much all the ways earlier models did. But large language models have another shortcoming that has so far gotten relatively little attention: their shoddy recall. These multibillion-dollar programs, which require several city blocks’ worth of energy to run, may now be able to code websites, plan vacations, and draft company-wide emails in the style of William Faulkner. But they have the memory of a goldfish.

-snip-

The trouble is that ChatGPT’s memory—and the memory of large language models more generally—is terrible. Each time a model generates a response, it can take into account only a limited amount of text, known as the model’s context window. ChatGPT has a context window of roughly 4,000 words—long enough that the average person messing around with it might never notice but short enough to render all sorts of complex tasks impossible. For instance, it wouldn’t be able to summarize a book, review a major coding project, or search your Google Drive. (Technically, context windows are measured not in words but in tokens, a distinction that becomes more important when you’re dealing with both visual and linguistic inputs.)

-snip-

GPT-4 still can’t retain information from one session to the next. Engineers could make the context window two times or three times or 100 times bigger, and this would still be the case: Each time you started a new conversation with GPT-4, you’d be starting from scratch. When booted up, it is born anew. (Doesn’t sound like a very good therapist.)

But even without solving this deeper problem of long-term memory, just lengthening the context window is no easy thing. As the engineers extend it, Millière told me, the computation power required to run the language model—and thus its cost of operation—increases exponentially. A machine’s total memory capacity is also a constraint, according to Alex Dimakis, a computer scientist at the University of Texas at Austin and a co-director of the Institute for Foundations of Machine Learning. No single computer that exists today, he told me, could support, say, a million-word context window.

-snip-

[/quote]

Good article while LLM's can be a useful tool just blindly scaling them is not a pathway to AGI and we will eventually hit a brick wall with them. They can be part of the solution in getting to AGI but are not the full solution themselves.

[wjfox]

[spryfusion]

[wjfox]

[spryfusion]

[wjfox]

[wjfox]

[wjfox]

[weatheriscool]

Zapier, Instagram and Plugins Accessible Via Chatgpt to Enable Destination ECommerce
April 1, 2023 by Brian Wang

OpenAI announced and released on Thursday, March 23, 2023, the capability to have plugins associated with their widely and wildly successful generative AI app known as ChatGPT. This has undoubtedly caused a ripple in the energy force across all of the AI realm and beyond.

OpenTable restaurant tables can be accessed via ChatGPT via plugins.

E-commerce is now fully accessible via ChatGPT.

There are plugins to get real-time internet updates and data.

https://www.nextbigfuture.com/2023/04/z ... ore-181352

[wjfox]

[wjfox]

Germany considers following Italy in banning ChatGPT

Tue, 4 April 2023 at 11:10 am BST

Germany may follow Italy's example by banning ChatGPT due to personal information security concerns, claimed the nation's data protection chief.

On Monday, German commissioner for data protection Ulrich Kelber told the Handelsblatt newspaper that his nation could follow Italy's recent ChatGPT ban and issue a similar enforcement.

After Italy's data protection agency launched an investigation into a suspected breach of privacy rules by ChatGPT, Kelber stated that, "in principle, such action is also possible in Germany".

He added that this would fall within the jurisdiction of each of the nation's federal states.

Kelber said that German regulators have been in communication with their Italian counterparts following the ban in Italy.

https://uk.news.yahoo.com/germany-chatg ... 58703.html

[Cyber_Rebel]

Why do I feel like this has more to it than data protection? I'm usually on the side of the EU when it comes to regulatory measures, especially with their handling of the internet as opposed to our more Vulture like advertising policies. But this just isn't one of them. They'll risk falling behind by not adopting A.I. while we're still at an early stage of adoption.

Perhaps they'll attempt to follow the U.K.'s example and have an open-source state run public model which would fall more in line within their jurisdiction. To simply ban it outright is almost reactionary and disappointing.