[HN Gopher] New Capabilities for GPT-3: Edit and Insert
___________________________________________________________________
New Capabilities for GPT-3: Edit and Insert
Author : todsacerdoti
Score : 57 points
Date : 2022-03-15 19:16 UTC (3 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (openai.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (openai.com)
| drusepth wrote:
| Really, really happy they're enabling the edits endpoint as a
| free-to-use beta for now. In my experience, GPT-3 works really
| well but is pretty prohibitively expensive unless you're
| optimizing for profitable tasks. Offering even limited-time free
| use (and unlimited tokens) is a nice nudge toward the "open" in
| OpenAI.
|
| Also, the edit/insert endpoints specifically should
| hypothetically help a _lot_ with plot divergence, which has been
| a huge problem trying to generate long-form works with standard
| completions, even with top-down outline expansion strategies,
| scene transition metadata, etc.
|
| Excited to see what the millions of "AI word processors" that've
| sprung up over the past year actually do with it, besides the
| obvious.
| minimaxir wrote:
| I did a few nonscientific tests:
| https://twitter.com/minimaxir/status/1503822287903985664
|
| Both the edit endpoint (used in those tweets) and the insert
| endpoint have mixed performance and tend to go off-the-rails
| often, especially compared to the new "Instruct" models which do
| a much better job, although expensive while these new endpoints
| are in a free beta.
|
| The coding endpoints are slightly better but a more narrow
| domain.
|
| In all cases I recommend looking at the docs for examples.
| jarbus wrote:
| Does anyone actually use Copilot for their work? I can't imagine
| it's anywhere near as reliable as OpenAI claims. I'd imagine a
| user would spend more time fixing mistakes or re-trying with
| different queries than they'd actually save.
| gavinray wrote:
| Yeah. I thought the same thing at first, had it for ~2 months
| in early access and never turned it on.
|
| Now I can't live without it.
| rictic wrote:
| I use it all the time, it's significantly improved my
| productivity.
|
| It's a little like pair programming with an incredibly eager
| junior developer who has read a lot of the documentation of
| every popular API in the world. I need to review the code it
| produces, but it's very fast, and its suggestions are usually
| great.
|
| It's annoying when I know exactly what I want to write, and
| most helpful when I'm unsure (either because I'm trying things
| out, or if I'm using a new API or a language I'm rusty at).
| zoba wrote:
| In my experience copilot is amazing.
|
| It prompted the (joke) thought that perhaps it is making me
| less productive because of how often I end up sitting back and
| marveling at how amazing it is. I really can't believe how good
| it is.
| unwoundmouse wrote:
| I use copilot, it's much more useful than you'd expect. Really
| helpful for places where you would normally need to record a
| small macro, copilot can infer the completions easily
| powersnail wrote:
| One thing that it's really good at is writing boilerplate-y
| code. For example, web scrapers. It can even read the
| function's name and deduce some proper variable names, or use
| variable names to deduce whether I want a list of elements or
| one element. Not 100% correct, of course, but good enough if
| you treat it like an advanced snippet manager.
| karmasimida wrote:
| For boilerplate code, Copilot gets the job done.
|
| But you need to set the right expectations that it is not
| magic, which requires some tuning.
| davidbarker wrote:
| I've been using it every day for a few months (for
| Typescript/React), and it still astounds me.
|
| I can write a comment outlining what I want a function to do,
| and 90% of the time it will generate the code I need (or very
| close with a couple of small tweaks needed).
|
| Coincidentally, my Stack Overflow visits have decreased by
| approximately 90%.
| IanCal wrote:
| It really is surprisingly good. I use it.
|
| It's quick to scan and ignore things that aren't right, and
| it's either completely right or close enough that it definitely
| feels like a timesaver.
|
| The best parts are where it's doing something long-winded but
| fairly straight forward (e.g. assigning variables). But it has
| moments of shocking ability with more complex things.
| drusepth wrote:
| I've used it briefly in someone else's IDE (who swears by it)
| and it blew me away. It pretty much removed ever having to
| google syntax or snippets from SO in a language I wasn't
| totally familiar with (python).
| nyanpasu64 wrote:
| Just wanted to have a less glowing counterpoint to the other
| claims. I've used Copilot a bit, and found that the automatic
| completion was frequently interrupting my train of thought,
| making it harder to concentrate ("intrusive thoughts as a
| service"). I preferred only triggering completions upon
| pressing a keystroke, so I _choose_ when to take a shortcut and
| ask to have code generated. I found it very helpful for
| generating boilerplate code, and debug logging I shouldn 't
| have to think too hard about. Also it sometimes gave me clever
| ideas better than I thought of myself (like Rust code matching
| on a HashMap's Entry). Nonetheless I felt uneasy because I
| noticed myself getting too "lazy", not thinking about what code
| I want written before asking for help.
|
| In the end, aside from boilerplate, I spend most of my time in
| Qt Creator (which doesn't have a Copilot plugin) rather than VS
| Code, so I mostly stopped using Copilot anyway.
| muzani wrote:
| Personally using Codex, not Copilot, but similar engine.
|
| It's really good for boilerplate. Things like TDD tests where
| I'm just modifying a few parameters. You can get it to write
| functions like "parse this DateTime object into a format like
| Tuesday, 15 May 2020".
|
| It's a useful lookup too. Like often I just want to extract a
| variable from a List and would spend 15 mins looking up the
| docs or sifting Stack Overflow. Codex is more faster and
| accurate.
|
| With GPT-3 it's garbage in, garbage out. You have to invest a
| few days in learning the prompts that work.
| jjwiseman wrote:
| I use it constantly and hope I never have to code without it
| (or something better) again. It does a good job writing the
| kind of boring code I don't want to write, and it generally
| seems to include fewer errors than I write in my first drafts
| of code. More than once I ignored its suggestion and wrote my
| own version, only to later realize its version was more correct
| and efficient. It does a good (sometimes incredible) job of
| even handling pretty specialized subject matter, and of using
| the context of other code and comments you've written to
| suggest exactly what you need next.
| amelius wrote:
| > It does a good job writing the kind of boring code I don't
| want to write (...)
|
| If only we had programming languages that didn't force us to
| write boring code in the first place ...
| [deleted]
| armchairhacker wrote:
| At first I thought copilot would be pretty useless until I
| actually tried it. It turns out that a lot of code is
| boilerplate and the same simple patterns, even with
| abstraction. Copilot is not particularly genius, but it fills
| in simple patterns (e.g. do the same for the Y-axis that you
| did for the X-axis), and autocompletes typical utility
| functions (e.g. add 2 2d positions, shuffle an array,
| setTimeout promise, etc. which I have to write functions for
| because they are not in the JavaScript standard library.) These
| may seem like odd scenarios but there are actually a lot of
| them.
| superasn wrote:
| Big supporter of Copilot. I am still amazed how good it is and
| I feel it's getting better and better. So much boilerplate code
| gone. Also it really gives you a boost in confidence when the
| A.I writes the same code you're thinking. I feel so lucky
| having to see these amazing developments in A.I and V.R.
| recently.
| samwillis wrote:
| I'm on the copilot wait list, super excited to give it a go.
| Cheeky question, does anyone know of a way to get it sooner?
| davidbarker wrote:
| Try emailing the GitHub CEO. I did, regarding the Codespaces
| waitlist, and he sent me three riddles to answer correctly
| before I could get access.
|
| (I realise this sounds like I'm making it up, but I promise
| this is a real story. It was quite fun.)
| Smaug123 wrote:
| I find the autocompletion for "improve the runtime complexity of
| the [Fibonacci] function" at the top excruciating. Surely Codex
| has seen verbatim the two-argument form many times?
| zackees wrote:
| The open ai project CoPilot is just absolutely amazing. I would
| say that it increases my productivity by 5x because it eliminates
| a lot of going to stack overflow to find the answer.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2022-03-15 23:00 UTC)