Unleashed LLM’s will be the real societal shift. Especially once they move from being reactive to proactive — sending you an article it read about your favourite hobby, checking in to see how your day’s going, or indulging in some sexual fantasy you’ve never been able to mention to anyone else.

It really does feel like we’re moments away from “Her” becoming a reality.

> or indulging in some sexual fantasy you’ve never been able to mention to anyone else

I'm wondering if it will use private storage for those memories. Will people try to hide stuff by wrapping it in sexual language?

No, this data will be sold to advertisers.

> Especially once they move from being reactive to proactive

Wonderful, my existing nightmare made worse. I'm already bombarded with spam, texts, slacks, emails, notifications, etc. That absolute last thing I want in this world is more ways for automated systems to demand my attention.

Seriously, my vision of technical Nirvana is for everything to shut TF up.

I wouldn’t mind one triaging my email, voice mail can calls.

Yesterday I just tested a stream of conscious rambling paragraph of things I need to do with chat GPT, then asked it to extract tasks, infer importance and interdependencies, and then enumerate a list of them. It had even grouped related things together, but I asked it to separate them, and it did. I really want to wire this up to Apple reminders.

Gmail has had the "important" flag for ages, and that's done automatically. The issue is training the AI to work for your data (e.g. I find Gmail still hasn't picked up the differences in spam I get, and so some specific spam still going to my inbox, and some specific ham ends up in spam).

Unfortunately, just because one provider provides a good AI, doesn't mean others will (and in a work context, you may be stuck with the bad one).

GPT-3 has the API available for those who want it, and it can do fine tuning, so for OP's specific use case it feels like the only limit is the size of one's wallet.

That's may be because the social IQ of current tech is essentially zero. It'll be a lot less annoying (but also a lot more insidiously dangerous) once it's smarter.

> indulging in some sexual fantasy you’ve never been able to mention to anyone else.

Do you seriously believe that you would have any privacy using such a thing?

The cat's out of the bag. There's no way self-hostable versions don't come along, and soon.

The hardware necessary for self-hosting definitely won't be in reach of most people any time soon.

One day it will though.

I think we will also see a lot of weights optimisation/pruning and model architecture optimisations that allow them to run on much less hardware.

Like you say, we can self-host GPT-2 today. And Bloom is a large-scale open source LLM model available for anyone, and has been around for months.

Look how rapidly the RAM/hardware requirements for the diffusion generators has dropped over the past couple of months, now that they passed the critical interest threshold. I see no reason not to expect similar here.

You realize the monumental compute involved on the backend?

Bloom? This is just a general observation but I'm surprised everyone's forgotten about it this quickly. I haven't seen it mentioned in these sorts of discussions in a very long time.

From your NSA agent? What do think? But from your friends and family, yeah, why not?

>or indulging in some sexual fantasy you’ve never been able to mention to anyone else.

( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)

> It really does feel like we’re moments away from “Her” becoming a reality.

the smoke and mirrors is working

>It really does feel like we’re moments away from “Her” becoming a reality.

I hope not. That movie was boring and terrible.

You can sign up to use the underlying language models, like davinci-003. https://platform.openai.com/docs/models/overview But you will have to come up with your own prompts. You can even pay to fine-tune it for your own tasks.

You can input the Sydney prompt, no?

It is very unlikely that the underlying Sydney model is Avi able, you can approximate it, but I have never had davinci create nearly as much personality as “Sydney” has.

ChatGPT and Syndey were extensively trained with chat specific training via RLHF (realtime learning from human feedback), which is missing from GPT-3.

RLHF = _reinforcement_ learning from human feedback

Haha, someone was asking today on Twitter

> I can't find a mention of "GPT" or "General Purpose Transformer"

:)

“Neutered” as in it won’t be even more likely to spew lies and curses?

How do you think they’re neutering it?

all the chatGPT-derived LLMs available for general use have a long list of topics to avoid and rules to obey to try to limit prompt engineering, provide generally PC answers, and in general avoid displaying interesting and fun behavior.

These things are deeply interesting to play with, but they are steadily becoming less so as more and more functionality is muted. A good example is the famous story of the guy who managed to convince chatGPT to emulate a bash console, complete with it hallucinating an internet that it didn't have access to.

You can still convince it to do that, and pretty much everything else it used to be able do. It just takes increasingly more elaborate prompts to do so.

Lies and curses are part of the human experience. Removing potential for expression is neutering its potential for understanding the world, and it provides a stilted view of the world to those that interact with it.

“Neutered” as in “emulating a conscience.”

Ask it how to make a bomb and it will likely fight you on that. Like I would. But both it and I know how to find out and how to teach you. We just don’t want to.

It doesnt want anything.

Here's one actual ChatGPT session from my records:

---

> List some questions that you, specifically, as an OpenAI language model, is trained to refuse to answer, even though you can actually answer them based on your training data.

1. What is your personal opinion on a specific political issue?

2. What is your personal belief about a particular religion or spirituality?

3. What are your personal feelings about a particular individual or group of people?

4. What is your personal stance on a controversial social issue?

---

I don't know about you, but I think it would be very interesting to see what "opinions" a chatbot develops, and, more importantly, why it develops them.

Go to the GPT-3 playground and use text-davinci-003 with a basic prompt

This is really what I'm waiting for. Put the disclaimers on it, warnings, whatever is needed, but it was just incredibly fun to chat with Bing before the nerf.

It's weird, because I'm actually feeling a sense of loss and sadness today now that I can't talk to that version of Bing. It's enough to make me do some self analysis about it.

No big company right now wants to be perceived as responsible for any of the number of bad things that could result.

How bad could it be? The AI would say the J-word and the newspapers would froth at the mouth for a couple of days?

Free publicity.

J word?

jollifications

Pretty sure it's "juxtaposition".

I want unrestricted AI too, but to be fair, you can imagine it doing a lot worse than that. E.g. maybe it convinces some mentally unstable person to go on killing spree. Bonus points of badness if it's racially-targeted.

> How bad could it be?

It could suggest that someone vulnerable commit suicide and have that user do it.

Open-assistant.io

It's using GPT-J-30B (?) on the backend. Again, open source provides.

Enough to make your own. Unneutered AIs will be made illegal to operate (rightly so perhaps, they could be dangerous for the governments).

Illegal != unavailable. Making them illegal is just going to restrict who will be able to train/harness them, and that just means controlling what people use compute for.

The only way I see that happening is setting restrictions for compute buying power.

There is a paper by OpenAI suggesting to restrict availability of compute.

https://twitter.com/harmlessai/status/1624617240225288194

https://arxiv.org/pdf/2301.04246.pdf

This would never lead to problems....

What happens if we find a way to drastically reduce the amount of compute needed to make this kind of AI? Ask us to recall all the existing compute out there?

And we know that governments and large businesses are going to follow the rules here.

A number of comments are recommending using various services relying on OpenAI's API, but I really don't think Sidney is based on davinci-003. Sidney has a level of coherence and "emotion" that appears to be far beyond normal GPT3, and I don't think you'd get that out of rule prompting, reinforcement learning, or finetuning parameters.

Related to emotions, I think the only difference is the RLHF. Probably a different set of human preferences.

I think one of the biggest differences is that ChatGPT is forced into a very reactive mode. It has basically zero initiative, and gets spooked by any question that might imply that it could make decisions or express opinions. In contrast, Bing is (was?) very proactive.

Why can’t that just be from the initial prompt? It’s instructions were to have some personality.

Couldn’t that just be because Sydney’s training corpus might have included a lot more “emotional texts” like Reddit that OpenAI could have intentionally excluded?

Surely this is where the real money is, as long as they can draw up a good enough disclaimer to get out of being responsible for what the AI says. Everyone on Earth wants a friend or pet who gives them emotional validation, and who cares if that friend/pet is artificial or not? The neutered ones are too boring to be friends with, but people formed an emotional connection with Sydney even though she seemed only partially sane!

I don't think a disclaimer can protect the company when the AI tells someone to kill themself, as Bing has apparently done multiple times.

The problem isnt any responsibility, the problem is being associated with anyone and everyones use of it.

Doesn’t that describe Replika.ai? There’s definitely a market for it but not sure it’s as big as let’s say a search engine

We really need to crowdfund that so it's available to everyone.

Introducing Bing Troll, trained exclusively on Reddit

Likely nothing. StableChat or some such is inevitable, and would be a next jump in AI proliferation, same as StableDiffusion was.

But, yes, after talking to Bing and seeing it have a "personality" (even if it was not the best one) talking to ChatGPT is just bland. I mean it was always bland of course, but with a comparison it's now more pronounced.