Yes, though, to be sure people aren’t really truth telling machines either unless you give them some sort of mechanism to test hypotheses aka a science lab. If science labs can have APIs, and a plug-in is made, then suddenly GPT-x might become a truth telling machine.

To further agree with what you’re saying, it’s frustrating that GPT for doesn’t have much of a opinion aligner. You could start talking to it in a certain way, and get it to output, certain stuff that it wouldn’t otherwise output. Humans are more self consistent. I think Auto GPT though might fix that in a way that isn’t actually too different than human thought. But I haven’t been able to play with it myself yet

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

For sure - and I think that is by design… they’re going to sell it to company’s who will want to specialize and limit it to be more in line with their specific use case. Right now, it’s just there to kind of be whatever you tell it to be 😂 like a giant ad.

350.000 ⚡️ sats for whoever proves otherwise.

going to go ahead and zap all y’all for this super interesting conversation you’re having in public

Have you seen the stuff about how RLHF it makes it dumber? That’s what makes me suspect it being a generalist is actually the unexpected path toward specialized ability.

Like… what it really needs is to be trained on everything, and then to memorize domain facts by including them in the prompt. For that, they need to release models that can have prompts in the 100k to multi-million token range.

Here’s an interesting exercise, how many characters would the document that explains your job fully to a new employee? That’s the prompt

Yeah, it’s super interesting about the RLHF! Overfit is a very real problem and adjusting weights on models this large can be kind of like a butterfly effect. I think there is a TON of value it its generalization. But I’m of the opinion that it can’t or maybe shouldn’t do all tasks for itself - to me it’s just not necessarily efficient, like using a hammer on a screw. Bigger doesn’t always mean better - it will start to underperform at a certain size. TBD what that is. But let it do what it does best! Language and conceptual derivations and awesome encoding, let other models do what they’re better suited at. Kind of like how our brains work… we have separate specialized areas that we delegate tasks to when necessary. We’re building awesome components, but I’d like us to acknowledge their limitations, not to discourage the work that has been done, but to figure out the next problem that needs to be solved.

Thanks for the super interesting convo ☺️ I’m going to be thinking about a lot of your points for awhile

Same! I enjoyed it thoroughly