[HN Gopher] OpenAssistant Conversations - Democratizing Large La... ___________________________________________________________________ OpenAssistant Conversations - Democratizing Large Language Model Alignment [pdf] Author : pps Score : 130 points Date : 2023-04-15 17:04 UTC (5 hours ago) (HTM) web link (www.ykilcher.com) (TXT) w3m dump (www.ykilcher.com) | donfuzius wrote: | It's awesome that the OpenAssistant project made it this far with | a lot of crowed-sourced input. Congrats to the whole team that | works really hard trying to create a truly open LLM. | | One thing that puzzles me though, is that for the GPT-3.5 | comparison, the model used is trained using both OpenAssistant | and alpaca data, which is not free due to the OpenAI license used | to generate the data. Isn't that defeating the purpose? | | "... Completions were generated using pythia-12b-deduped fine- | tuned on the OpenAssistant and Alpaca [9] dataset as well as | gpt-3.5-turbo using the OpenAI API..." | saranormous wrote: | this is awesome. is there good research explaining methodology of | feedback collection/desired dataset (beyond just relative human | preference?) | kalium-xyz wrote: | Awesome how they shaped the authors their names into a heart | frog59059 wrote: | really excited! | visarga wrote: | This makes Turbo GPT 3.5 level AI free, private and finetuneable. | OpenAI exclusivity shrinks now to GPT-4. That's why I don't think | they will be able to keep a large market share in LLMs, any level | of AI is going to get open and free soon. SOTA models are also | easy to distill by API, very hard to defend against using chat | logs as training data for other models. | | Once we all got one running, maybe in the OS, maybe in the | browser, or as a separate app, then I see bad days ahead for | online advertising. Ads are simply omitted when the bot solves a | specific task for the user. We got infinitely tuneable and | efficient filters for everything that gets in front of our eyes, | and we will need these AI assistants to fight back the onslaught | of AI spam bots. We can make the internet a beautiful garden | again if we control the filters and the UI. | armchairhacker wrote: | The problem is that for-profit businesses like OpenAI have more | money and compute than even millions of volunteers. I | definitely believe we'll get an open GPT-4 eventually, but by | then OpenAI will have GPT-5, and so on. | | It's a shame really: the ultimate cause is the massive amount | of wealth inequality we have today. If private entities and | governments didn't have so much resources compared to | individuals, I'm certain an open-source AI would be the | biggest, because open-source has intrinsic benefits over | closed-source: you have many people all working on the same | project vs. multiple siloed groups, and anyone not affiliated | with the private service is biased to use and support the open | one. This is why the best operating systems, programming | languages, and other software are all open-source: more money | != better software, you don't need money to build software as | much as you need intelligence and work ethic. But with AI, the | #1 limiting factor is web-scraping required to get all of the | data, and GPUs to train a model with it (maybe also money to | pay Mechanical-Turk workers for simple classification; but | perhaps enough volunteers could beat this, plus it seems like | unskilled classification is becoming less important since the | models can do this on their own). | | That's not to say open-source AI won't be great, and I also | think most places will use it. Especially if OpenAI is too | expensive and/or disallows what they are trying to do. It does | put pressure on OpenAI to be more lenient with pricing and | acceptable use, and also to keep improving. But unless we | address the massive wealth inequality, which is why LAION has | substantially less funding than not just OpenAI but also some | of the other startups, it's going to always lag behind. | pleasantpeasant wrote: | Won't open-source AIs have their code stolen by the private | AIs? There's no one stopping open-source AIs being used | within private AIs. | huijzer wrote: | Although FOSS is great, extreme wealth inequality has to be | fixed by the government and not by open source developers. | KolmogorovComp wrote: | Side question, but how do these models are benchmarked, and how | is this subfield evolving these days? I have seen many papers | relying on standard student tests performance, but they don't | seem very accurate since LLAMA-based models perform almost as | good as chatGPT (3/3.5) despite being apparently being an order | of magnitude worse in practice. | pleasantpeasant wrote: | I can't wait for an ad companies to force you to watch a 10 | second video ad before it gives you a result for your query. | | It's only a matter of time before these AI companies start | pairing up with ad companies(if they already haven't). Google | could easily put ad videos every 10 queries or something. You | already see these limited free tokens/credits/querie on AI art | sites. | | How long until they put some ads in-between queries? | kmod wrote: | Do you have any evidence that this is GPT-3.5 level, or are you | just repeating what they said? We have an abundance of claimed | capabilities already; that's not what's lacking. | bugglebeetle wrote: | I tried a few prompts I use in production stuff and it failed | on all of them and hallucinated quite a bit more. All of | these models are optimized for the gimmicky chatbot stuff | that seems impressive to a casual user, but not for | comparable capabilities to GPT-3.5. I wish what the parent | said was true because it would save me money! | akiselev wrote: | Which open model comes closest to GPT-3.5 in your | production workload, if you don't mind me asking? | bugglebeetle wrote: | None of them really, because I use complex prompts with | task breakdowns that no other models beside OpenAI's seem | capable of processing. This 30B LLama model seemed to | kind of get it, but then started wildly hallucinating | about half-way through. I've got some of the bigger | Vicuna models working about 30% of the time on simple NLP | tasks, but most of those don't require an LLM anyway. | They might perform better if you fine-tune them for | whatever particular job, but that kind of defeats the | purpose. The advantage of LLMs is supposed to be their | generalized capabilities. | WhatIsDukkha wrote: | Section E of the paper we are "discussing" here. | skilled wrote: | What beautiful garden? Are you completely ignoring the fact | that OpenAI is made possible because it scraped the entire Web | (the actual garden) and made a query index out of it? | | Do you not have any respect for people who actually spent their | time and creativity to provide the information necessary for | this model to even work? | | Ignorance is bliss I guess. | sebzim4500 wrote: | >Do you not have any respect for people who actually spent | their time and creativity to provide the information | necessary for this model to even work? | | We all stand on the shoulders of giants, the authors of this | content did not grow up in a concrete box isolated from the | works of earlier generations. | boredemployee wrote: | >> Do you not have any respect for people who actually spent | their time and creativity to provide the information | necessary for this model to even work? | | The worrying is legit and cute but let's face that at this | moment no one is giving a f. | | All we see are people worried that all the AI agents will | take their jobs and/or how to make money out of that. | skilled wrote: | You're right. I myself don't care either, but not because I | don't understand how it happened. I don't because there is | nothing I can say or do that would make OpenAI suddenly | change their direction. | scubbo wrote: | > Do you not have any respect for people who actually spent | their time and creativity to provide the information | necessary for this model to even work? | | Yes, which is why I'm delighted to be able to filter out the | advertizing spam that subhuman scum traffic alongside the | outputs of creativity. | zmnd wrote: | Out of curiosity, do you use ad blocking software? | syrusakbary wrote: | Here's the website they just launched, in case it's useful for | anyone: | | https://open-assistant.io/ | machinelearning wrote: | If you're trying to use this and don't get the sign up email, | check your spam folder. Gmail seems to auto-categorize the email | as spam | marcodiego wrote: | And... Where is the data? | | EDIT: trying it now with model "OA_SFT_Llama_30B_6". It is FAR | worse than ChatGPT. | KaoruAoiShiho wrote: | What is the token limit? The 2k limit on llama is *very limiting | on the number of things it can do. | pps wrote: | Video about the release: | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ddG2fM9i4Kk | TOMDM wrote: | This is the same Pythia and Llama based models right? | | If so, they certainly aren't ChatGPT level in their quality. | Impressive, potentially useful, but not ChatGPT. | | Still an incredible effort, the RLHF data here might eventually | make an Open Source ChatGPT possible, but these models are not | that. ___________________________________________________________________ (page generated 2023-04-15 23:00 UTC)