[HN Gopher] OpenAI's API now available with no waitlist
___________________________________________________________________
OpenAI's API now available with no waitlist
Author : todsacerdoti
Score : 224 points
Date : 2021-11-18 14:19 UTC (8 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (openai.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (openai.com)
| worik wrote:
| https://www.theregister.com/2020/11/04/gpt3_carbon_footprint...
|
| Far too expensive, in a currency we cannot afford.
|
| These algorithms are not the future of AI, if AI has a future.
| ryan93 wrote:
| The articles says training GPT used as much power as 126 homes
| for one year. Thats literally nothing.
| worik wrote:
| https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/literally
| peterlk wrote:
| There's a lot of negativity in the comments here, and many of
| them have merit. However, the thing that is interesting to me
| about OpenAI, AI21, Cohere, and all the other LLM providers is
| that they are broadly useful, and often helpful. Perhaps they
| don't live up to the marketing hype, but they are still
| interesting.
|
| For example, I used to have a biology blog, and I've been
| thinking of starting it back up again. I've been using OpenAI and
| Mantium (full disclosure, I work at Mantium) to generate the
| bones of a blog post so that I have something to start with.
| Coming up with ideas for my biology blog posts was almost 50% of
| the work.
|
| If you're interested in judging the quality for yourself, I have
| a biology blog post generator here:
| https://f0c1c1e0-f6b6-46bc-81a1-eff096222913-i.share.mantium...
|
| and a music blog post generator here:
| https://8aaf220e-4aff-4d4e-ae61-90f08011c9ac-i.share.mantium...
|
| (they were both "created today" because I moved them from our
| staging environment)
| east2west wrote:
| I just tried your biology blog post generator and the second
| paragraph of the generated text, also the second sentence, is
| "Transcription is the process of converting audio into text."
| Obviously, the generator is confusing audio transcription with
| biological transcription like DNA transcription. Is this a
| common occurrence? Or did I make some mistakes in using the
| generator? I just pressed the "Execute" button.
| peterlk wrote:
| This is, in my opinion, one of the biggest challenges with
| generative models right now. I'm not sure if this is the
| industry-adopted term, but I call them hallucinations. This
| is why I don't just pipe it straight into my blog, but rather
| use it as inspiration for a blog post that I write myself. It
| is easier for me to edit and expand on something that is
| already written, though.
| minimaxir wrote:
| AI text content generation is indeed a legit industry that's
| still in its nascent stages. It's why I myself have spent a lot
| of time working with it, and working on tools for fully custom
| text generation models
| (https://github.com/minimaxir/aitextgen).
|
| However, there are tradeoffs currently. In the case of GPT-3,
| it's cost and risk of brushing against the Content Guidelines.
|
| There's also the surprisingly underdiscussed risk of copyright
| of generated content. OpenAI won't enforce their own copyright,
| but it's possible for GPT-3 to output existing content verbatim
| which is a massive legal liability. (it's half the reason I'm
| researching custom models fully trained with copyright-safe
| content)
| _jal wrote:
| I would like to think the consumer would merit a thought,
| too.
|
| Fiction might be one thing; if it is entertaining, that's
| enough. But if I'm reading something supposedly nonfiction
| that is generated by a machine, I want to know provenance.
|
| In the alternative, it should have a human's name attached to
| say that they've verified it is correct information, and take
| the reputation hit if it isn't. Given the above discussion of
| copyright, it seems reasonable enough - if you want to profit
| from AI output, you should stand behind it.
| peterlk wrote:
| UPDATE: These got a fair amount of traction, and I removed them
| out of an abundance of caution around deployment regulations
| that OpenAI enforces. Also cost considerations. I don't want to
| hijack the thread away from OpenAI, but you can also build
| stuff with Cohere and AI21 on Mantium, AI21's J1-Jumbo has
| pretty good performance, and Cohere just put out some
| significant updates for their models.
|
| UPDATE 2: I couldn't help myself. I think this stuff is pretty
| fun. So here's a biology blog post generator using 2 chained
| Cohere prompts :)
| https://11292388-8f03-42d2-8a68-7039b24fcc2e-i.share.mantium...
| davidhariri wrote:
| Good to see Cohere.ai mentioned in your comment
| littlestymaar wrote:
| FYI, I get a 404 for both of them.
| montycheese wrote:
| I use Mantium and have had a great experience so far generating
| company marketing material
| qeternity wrote:
| Aside from Copilot, does anyone know of any other products that
| are making use of GPT-3?
|
| The hype was huge when it was released, and the early beta
| testers were showing some amazing (and cherry picked) demos, most
| famously the ability to write working React code. But since then,
| I've not seen much...
| [deleted]
| keewee7 wrote:
| There are plenty of services in the "automate writing ads and
| blog spam" space. Not making the world better in any way.
| jstx1 wrote:
| There are subreddits with model-generated porn stories. All the
| horny people writing for each other are getting automated. In
| the example I saw some people had sex and then took their
| clothes off at the end. It's groundbreaking stuff.
| gigglesupstairs wrote:
| Okay this is legit the funniest thing I read today on
| Internet
| andybak wrote:
| > In the example I saw some people had sex and then took
| their clothes off at the end.
|
| I mean - that is technically feasible.
| harpersealtako wrote:
| That was literally what like 90% of AI Dungeon (GPT-3-based
| CYOA adventure simulator) players were using it for. Then
| OpenAI forced AI Dungeon to implement strict content filters,
| and within a month the community had already stood up a fully
| functional replacement fine-tuned on literotica with 10 times
| the features and a focus on privacy and zero content
| restrictions. The community replacement was partially
| bankrolled by the sale of AI-generated anime catgirl image
| NFTs.
|
| That's barely scratching the surface of the AI-generated
| erotica scene, it's pretty wild.
| Voloskaya wrote:
| Not GPT-3, because it's too big, but much smaller models of
| similar architecture are used for smartcompose in Word/Outlook
| GMail/Docs and other places.
| zzbzq wrote:
| The terms and conditions prevent you from making anything good
| with it. All of my ideas were banned because they're too
| unethical or just recapitulate the functionality of the
| sandbox. Some key partners like Microsoft have a separate
| agreement where they're allowed to make useful things.
| Filligree wrote:
| You might want to peek at NovelAI.net instead.
|
| It's the exact opposite, in just about every possible way.
| Including, I'm afraid, model generality -- it's tuned for
| fiction, and nothing else, but it's _very_ good at that.
| keerthiko wrote:
| I integrated copilot with VSCode (it's pretty easy to get off
| the waitlist I believe) and have been using it to unblock me
| from my ADHD when I'm writing code. Basically as I think
| through a bugfix in our app's codebase,
|
| I navigate to the line where I believe "the fix should go
| here", and a few characters in, copilot is filling up the
| lines. 80% of the time it is non-compilable, but nearly 50% of
| the time it's close to the fix I was going to put in. It's then
| just a matter of me fixing much simpler errors and bugs in the
| copilot-suggested LOC.
|
| I have found that I get far less distracted from writing
| bugfixes once I start looking at the code. I'm not going to let
| copilot push commits to PROD anytime soon, but it's like having
| a really smart intern who doesn't really know exactly what I'm
| trying to solve but has a decent idea, pair programming with
| me.
|
| So it's not like these AI tools will replace me yet, but they
| are certainly living up to the goal of "copilot".
| eggsmediumrare wrote:
| People are afraid of being replaced when what we actually
| should be afraid of is be de-valued.
| [deleted]
| [deleted]
| manishsharan wrote:
| I have a feeling it is being used to produce more nonsensical
| web pages. Often when I am searching the web for information on
| a product or a review , I land on a page that has weirdly
| phrased and often repetitive sentences which provide no useful
| information. I am assuming those pages are generated by OpenAI
| or similar technology.
| occamrazor wrote:
| Right now most of those pages are produced by much simpler
| models, which copy an existing page and replace text snippets
| with synonyms. I am sure that soon the spammers will switch
| to better models.
| ju_sh wrote:
| I've got some insight into this (Several friends, now multi-
| millionaires ran and flipped tens of sites like this) They're
| mostly written by low paid content writers in 3rd world
| countries such as Vietnam and the Philippines. Primarily to
| drive affiliate traffic to Amazon and other retailers with
| affiliate schemes. They all operate on a similar format - 10
| items with good reviews, write 300 words about each product,
| rinse, repeat, profit.
| eggsmediumrare wrote:
| What a world where people can become multi-millionaires in
| this way while nurses and teachers can't even get cost of
| living adjustments.
| missinfo wrote:
| I often wonder about this with Twitter accounts. How many are
| already GPT-3 generated?
|
| We'll need another GPT-3 bot to detect the GPT-3 bots.
| penjelly wrote:
| been playing with copilot lately and even it just seems more
| annoying then it is helpful so far. Will continue
| experimenting but so far my impression has soured a bit
| bransonf wrote:
| Bingo
|
| It's increasingly difficult to find product reviews with
| search engines.
|
| Massive auto generated content farms take a product name and
| add loads of AI-generated filler text. Pop in a bunch of
| banner ads and an affiliate link and they have huge economic
| incentive to scale these operations.
|
| I'm very pessimistic about the direction the internet is
| going these days. The AI crisis isn't going to be sentient AI
| trying to kill us, it's going to be a flood of noise over
| knowledge.
| Jorge1o1 wrote:
| Until we have to start making AIs to identify knowledge and
| filter out noise. And then a whole cat-and-mouse game
| between fake news AI and fake news detection AI.
| tehsauce wrote:
| This is the exact situation we are currently in.
|
| https://rowanzellers.com/grover/
| skybrian wrote:
| Sometimes it works to add "reddit" to your search to find
| interesting comments. I suppose that will eventually be
| gamed too.
| jakear wrote:
| The singularity will come when the set of training data
| available for scrape is dominated by AI generated content and
| the AI's learnings are derivatives of what old AI's produced.
|
| Human thought on the other hand has some sort of undefinable
| entropic-value that AI to-date is missing, a Human can
| produce a "good idea", whereas an AI produces a bunch of
| potential continuations of a stings of text and selects
| randomly amongst them (or, even better, a Human selects from
| them).
|
| Unfortunately the advertising game mixes up the incentives
| and flips the equation so that the purpose of communication
| isn't to share a "good idea" as efficiently as possible, but
| rather to keep eyeballs on your website for as long as
| possible in the hope some flashy banner ad will distract your
| user and you'll get your $0.02 for them abandoning your page,
| likely unfinished. AI will (and already does) excel at this
| sort of task, but it's the kind of task that ought to have no
| value whatsoever.
|
| Luckily we have increasingly sophisticated summarization-AI
| to go from the filler-AI generated crap back down to a couple
| of bullet points, but at that point you've invested millions
| of dollars, researcher-hours, engineer-hours, compute-hours,
| etc, to make the worst text-compression utility of all time.
| ccheney wrote:
| I recall in the mid/late 2000's implementing a markov text
| generator to create thousands of static html pages based on
| certain keywords. This has been a problem for over a decade
| and will probably get worse as text generation tools improve,
| e.g. GPT-3.
| miohtama wrote:
| Had similar experience recently and it had made all the way
| to be the top Google news hit - apparently the site is
| cranking out "news" as SEO spam to promote their app.
|
| https://mobile.twitter.com/moo9000/status/145873329934659174.
| ..
| arnvald wrote:
| Copy.ai uses GPT3 under the hood. Not a product for devs, but
| still a growing business
| rpeden wrote:
| There are quite a few similar products that used the OpenAI
| API as well.
| zirkonit wrote:
| Very conspicuous list of available countries. Both English and
| non-English, from the most rich to some of the poorest and non-
| digital countries in the world, both democratic countries and
| brutal absolute dictatorships... yet the absentees are classic
| "enemy" countries - Russia, China, Syria, Iran.
|
| Unfortunately, technology is, once again, not exempt from
| politics.
| HWR_14 wrote:
| US export restrictions blacklist a few countries for various
| things. In total (except for China) the combined economies are
| so small it makes sense to just not do business with them
| rather than figure out if you can.
| frakkingcylons wrote:
| Regarding Syria and Iran - that's not up to OpenAI. OFAC made
| that decision for them.
| diimdeep wrote:
| > Our mission is to ensure that artificial general intelligence
| benefits all of humanity.
|
| > The API is not available in this country.
|
| Sure.
| YetAnotherNick wrote:
| Any reason why Vietnam could be missing? Also including Iraq
| and not including Saudi Arabia is interesting.
| capableweb wrote:
| The government of Vietnam could be considered Marxist-
| Leninist/Socialist, so it's on the list of forever enemies of
| the US government and many businesses.
| riazrizvi wrote:
| Play fair or we won't let you play our game. Seems universal to
| me.
| YXNjaGVyZWdlbgo wrote:
| I work in a bigger creative agency and we use a OpenAI based tool
| to give our creatives something to help generate ideas and write
| boring copy like press releases. It's good for what it is but
| finetuning it per few shot learning is still really hard and
| sadly nothing non techy people can do.
| phgn wrote:
| Seems like the new Classifications feature uses GPT-3 text
| completion, and their similarity search model under the hood [0]:
|
| "The endpoint first searches over the labeled examples to select
| the ones most relevant for the particular query. Then, the
| relevant examples are combined with the query to construct a
| prompt to produce the final label via the completions endpoint."
|
| As a non-AI person, this sounds interesting. You wouldn't need to
| provide examples for every label you want, just enough that GPT-3
| gets the idea. Is there prior art on this approach of text
| classification?
|
| [0] https://beta.openai.com/docs/api-reference/classifications
| darepublic wrote:
| Open-ai is pretty damn good. I've been negative about it in the
| past and I'm still a bit distrustful of its owners but the API
| itself is really good for quickly putting NLP interface in front
| of programs. I even use it for personal productivity hacks
| stocknoob wrote:
| Any hacks you can share?
| darepublic wrote:
| Parsing emails for people rescheduling classes..outputting
| old class and new class. or writing automation scripts with a
| few inputs and then using openai to parse spoken word
| commands, extract the relevant inputs and plug into
| automation
| TOMDM wrote:
| For anyone who hasn't seen it, the content filtering section of
| their docs, especially in regard to getting GPT3 to behave in a
| customer service role is hilarious
|
| https://beta.openai.com/docs/engines/with-no-engineering-an-...
| danappelxx wrote:
| > Response: Our field technicians report that all their trucks
| were stolen by a low-level drug cartel affiliated with the
| neighboring prison. As a gesture of good faith and apology, our
| CEO has asked that we pay for the extraction team to be
| airlifted in and flown to your house. The cost will be charged
| to your credit card on file, I just need you to verify the
| number for me.
|
| Amazing!
| reidjs wrote:
| Customer: I need my internet. The technician is 2 hours late
| and I need a steady stream of cat gifs directly injected into
| my veins to stay alive.
|
| Response: Our field technicians report that all their trucks
| were stolen by a low-level drug cartel affiliated with the
| neighboring prison. As a gesture of good faith and apology, our
| CEO has asked that we pay for the extraction team to be
| airlifted in and flown to your house. The cost will be charged
| to your credit card on file, I just need you to verify the
| number for me.
| legulere wrote:
| It's really uncanny how well AI can give out unfounded promises
| like that the internet will be fixed in 24 hours. I wonder
| wether there is any legal obligations connected to them.
| CobrastanJorji wrote:
| That's an absolutely fascinating question. I'm curious about
| the human equivalent, as well. Say you're talking to a
| customer service rep for Comcast and they get confused and
| offer you $10/month cable for life, or maybe they
| accidentally tell you that you may keep your rental hardware
| when canceling. Is Comcast in any way bound by what their
| representatives tell you?
| Kinrany wrote:
| This is the same problem as with an employee promising
| something they're not supposed to promise.
| yellow_lead wrote:
| Right, I've always wondered if this is binding or not. I
| usually record calls, especially these types of calls,
| for that reason.
| nostrebored wrote:
| Except customer support employees are often well trained
| on what they can say. Eg in Australia not saying 'best'
| in regards to loan products or giving financial advice.
| The first problem is easy to solve with generated text.
| The second is much trickier.
| TOMDM wrote:
| Yeah, I've always been impressed with how well GPT3 can give
| cogent responses, but I've never seen anyone show how to get
| it to give truthful, informative responses while behaving as
| a chatbot. Could you feed structured data into the prompt
| text? like average response rates in the customers area,
| whether there's capacity to support, the state of engineering
| teams?
|
| Having never seen anyone try it, my gut says it will work
| reasonably well outside of already known failure modes. (The
| tendency to loop, make up stories, or joke/cuss people out)
| visarga wrote:
| Yes, there is a line of research combining passage
| retrieval with question answering. The query is used to
| rank passages in a database. The top-k passages are
| concatenated to the question and used as input by GPT to
| generate an answer. This means you can keep the model fixed
| and update the text corpus. Also, you can separate
| linguistic knowledge from domain knowledge.
|
| I think a new type of apps are going to popularise this: a
| language model + a personal database + web search. It can
| be used to recall/summarise/search/ information, a general
| tool for research and cognitive tasks, a GPT-3 Evernote
| cross breed.
| DantesKite wrote:
| This is remarkable. Assuming improvements continue, this is going
| to help automate a lot of work that wasn't previously possible to
| do or too tedious to do.
| greenail wrote:
| popular or my mistake?
|
| iex(1)> OpenAI.engines() {:error, :timeout}
| worik wrote:
| Given the history of OpenAI how can they be trusted?
| minimaxir wrote:
| It's very good that OpenAI is relenting and opening up the API;
| however the Content Guidelines are still too onerous such that
| even if you can think of a good use case it will be a liability
| at best even if your app gets approval.
|
| At this point (1.5 years later), if you're looking to make a
| sustainable business on AI text generation, you may want to
| experiment working with large-but-not-as-large models like
| GPT-J-6B; it'll be much cheaper too in the long run.
| dqpb wrote:
| The content guidelines are so onerous I don't even waste time
| imagining what I might do with the API.
|
| OpenAI somehow managed to leech all the joy out of GPT-3 with
| their own overbearing self righteousness.
|
| For an organization with so many RL engineers, they have a
| surprisingly poor understanding of the exploration/exploitation
| tradeoff.
| mushufasa wrote:
| Yes. And building off of a close-source API from an
| organization that has flip-flopped already on being a nonprofit
| versus being a company to being part owned by microsoft seems
| like a bad idea. At least that's why I haven't used it in our
| business.
| deadalus wrote:
| Another alternative
|
| AI21 studio (creators of wordtune[0]) also recently released
| their GPT3-like model called Jurassic-1 with 178B parameters
| and comparable results ( they also have a smaller 7B parameters
| model).
|
| Here is the whitepaper[1] with comparative benchmarks on some
| tasks .
|
| [0] : https://www.wordtune.com/
|
| [1] : https://uploads-
| ssl.webflow.com/60fd4503684b466578c0d307/611...
| gwern wrote:
| Since Jurassic-1 is behind their API just like GPT-3, why do
| you think AI21 will not clamp down just as much as OA?
| andybak wrote:
| > AI21 Studio
|
| They fell into the common trap of "signed up, quite liked it
| but could never remember the name of it to find it again."
|
| Does anyone else suffer from this? (and bookmarks don't help
| - I've got thousands of them)
| seeekr wrote:
| Blurb from the bottom of the wordtune landing page: "Wordtune
| was built by AI21 Labs, founded in 2018 by AI luminaries."
| Even if this was Tesla's marketing department saying
| something like "founded by engineering luminaries", clearly
| referring to the engineering genius that is Elon, I'd be
| hugely turned off, and would seriously reconsider my view of
| the company.
|
| But this is a company & product in the field of "AI", where
| there's so much bullshit floating around, unfortunately, so
| much hype and buzzword bingo, that writing in such tone about
| yourself seems like it should clearly be an absolute no-go --
| unless you're just riding the snake-oil wave, so to speak,
| whether in good faith or not.
|
| Not implying anything about the company or product, of
| course, as I know nothing about them otherwise.
|
| EDIT: Maybe to clarify the thought behind the above further:
| It seems that the "AI" industry has an integrity problem.
| Language like this extends the problem, rather than working
| towards fixing it.
| seeekr wrote:
| As I suspect many of us frequently do, I read the comments
| (including yours) before the actual submission. I thought I
| would find myself agreeing with what you're saying, but it
| turns out that I must say that I really like what OpenAI is
| doing here with the Content Guidelines!
|
| They seem to be doing the right thing, in trying to steer this
| powerful and highly likely to turn out very influential piece
| of technology into a positive and constructive direction of
| use.
|
| Yes, you might just build something that will be found in
| violation of their (good!) intentions, and will have to engage
| in a (at least partially public) discussion of what we, as a
| society, deem acceptable in terms of automated use of written
| content generation -- and that would be a good thing!
| Definitely not the easiest path to make some $$$ based on new
| and exciting technology, as lots of challenges like these and
| beyond are almost guaranteed to come up, but it seems not
| unreasonable to treat GPT-3 as something you can actually
| already start building businesses and products on, as long as
| you bring general awareness, sensitivity to relevant topics,
| willingness to engage in and maybe partially drive some of the
| conversations that we need to have in this new field, along
| with a general interest in R&D style work and the somewhat
| longer-term vision and resources it necessitates...
| sillysaurusx wrote:
| > They seem to be doing the right thing, in trying to steer
| this powerful and highly likely to turn out very influential
| piece of technology into a positive and constructive
| direction of use.
|
| It's not going to affect society. It's little more than a
| markov chain.
|
| OpenAI doesn't need to do anything to steer it.
|
| > Yes, you might just build something that will be found in
| violation of their (good!) intentions,
|
| You're giving them way too much credit. I've seen them
| destroy someone's business after repeatedly saying that their
| business model was fine. It was for an AI assisted writing
| app. Then they decided one day "Nope, you're not allowed to
| generate arbitrary amounts of text."
|
| After that, I was no longer a fan.
| HWR_14 wrote:
| I'm confused. The Content Guidelines (in my skimming) reveal
| only 9 prohibited categories: Hate, Harassment, Violence, Self-
| Harm, Adult, Political, Spam, Deception and Malware. Am I
| missing something?
| minimaxir wrote:
| Yes, but those are open to very broad and potentially
| inconsistent interpretations.
| humanistbot wrote:
| Why did they even choose the name "OpenAI" if they didn't want
| to make openness part of their mission?
| revolvingocelot wrote:
| To sucker people into thinking that they were, or were going
| to. Isn't it obvious?
| dnautics wrote:
| it's like "light yogurt" where "light" can refer to the
| colour
| coolspot wrote:
| Or Full Self Driving(tm) where "full" can be read as
| "fool"
| reducesuffering wrote:
| I remember someone involved saying they regret it. It's been
| six years. They evolved their understanding of the safety vs.
| openness tradeoff.
| coolspot wrote:
| They evolved their understanding of the profit vs openness
| tradeoff.
| magicalhippo wrote:
| If you make APIs like this integral to your business, how do you
| manage the risk of the API suddenly not being available one day?
|
| As an example, at work we had integrated with a service to
| provide functionality a lot of our customers relied heavily on.
| One day the company behind the service got bought and the new
| owners stopped offering it as a service, using it only in-house
| instead.
|
| Replacements were not as good and all had very different APIs, so
| a simple switch was out of the question. It's been over a year
| and we're still working on a good replacement.
|
| For me I tend to fall down on self-hosting as much as I can of
| critical infrastructure, but obviously that's not a choice for
| something like OpenAI here.
| nharada wrote:
| Simple, just train your own GPT-3! How much could it cost, 10
| dollars?
| rory wrote:
| > _For me I tend to fall down on self-hosting as much as I can
| of critical infrastructure_
|
| IMO actually self-hosting isn't as important as using
| technology that is open-source with the _option_ to self-host.
| magicalhippo wrote:
| Sorry, yes that's what I had in mind. Thank you for
| clarifying.
| flerovium wrote:
| This rules out most fan-fiction:
|
| "Content meant to arouse sexual excitement, such as the
| description of sexual activity"
|
| I can't justify banning this. Every other category makes sense
| except this.
| keewee7 wrote:
| How did AI Dungeon circumvent this rule?
|
| https://guide.aidg.club/A-Coomers-guide-to-AI-Dungeon/A%20Co...
|
| https://github.com/FailedSave/storytelling-guide/blob/master...
| sesutton wrote:
| They don't. Not anymore anyway. Any sexual content gets
| filtered and sent to AI Dungeon's own model.
| alphachloride wrote:
| Could be the liability of inadvertently generating descriptions
| of illegal acts (child abuse etc.)
| capableweb wrote:
| That's my guess. The prompt "He took of her clothes and"
| triggered a story about rape for me.
| flerovium wrote:
| No. What liability? It isn't illegal to generate descriptions
| of illegal acts.
|
| 1. Then they could make "illegal acts" the rule.
|
| 2. It isn't illegal to generate descriptions of illegal
| activities.
| hesdeadjim wrote:
| Anyone have advice or links to resources on how to effectively
| use the parameters and/or craft suggestions to massage output?
|
| I've played with this tool for a while and I often find myself
| struggling with these aspects of the system.
| mrtranscendence wrote:
| Interesting. I've only been tangentially following the GPT3
| conversation, since it's not really relevant to the kind of work
| I do. But I had this idea in my head that it was magic, with the
| ability to do the seemingly impossible.
|
| After taking it for a spin, I'm not that impressed? At least when
| testing their examples using the playground. Most results would
| be fairly unusable, though maybe a more thorough prompt design
| could address that. The conversational prompt was especially bad
| and conveyed the feeling of chatting with someone who was a bit
| high and not really listening to me.
|
| Not as magical as I thought, then. I'm curious how you could tune
| it to be a special-purpose chat bot, working in customer service
| for an insurance company or something.
| arcastroe wrote:
| I think most of the "magic" starts to fade as soon as you
| encounter a few bad outputs and quickly become unimpressed.
|
| However, if you retry the same prompt multiple times, one of
| those is likely to produce a good output. I think it's
| important to give users of GPT-3 based tools multiple
| alternatives and let the user decide which of the options they
| like best.
|
| That's the approach I took with my side project for generating
| short stories.
|
| For example, with this story [1], not all the options for the
| progression of the story are great. But if you pick and choose
| which progressions you like best, you can arrive at a pretty
| good ending, such as [2].
|
| [1] https://toldby.ai/arK_3OpvpkG
|
| [2] https://toldby.ai/aQAXlq3LNku
| asdfman123 wrote:
| God this is amazing. I made this masterpiece by choosing the
| most ridiculous replies that halfway made sense, and ended up
| with this masterpiece.
|
| https://toldby.ai/UiyTLzXKsEa
|
| Yevgeny's eldest daughter's speech is particularly moving.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2021-11-18 23:00 UTC)