Uh, so what's with the name 'OpenAI'?? This non-transparency does nothing to serve the name. I propose 'DisemblingAI' perhaps 'ConfidenceAI' or perhaps 'SeeminglyAI'
this post was submitted on 16 Sep 2024
337 points (98.8% liked)
Technology
58123 readers
4085 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Almost makes me wonder if this is a mechanical turk situation.
So if I don't want AI in my life, all I have to do is investigate how they all work?
"We're a scientific research company. We believe in open technology. Wait, what are you doing? Noooooo, you're not allowed to study or examine our ~~program~~ intelligent thinking machine!"
Less and less about OpenAI is actually... open at all.
Open to investigation: no
Open to sucking up your work and personal information: absolutely!
Open Angel Investment
What was open about them anyway? I thought it was a misnomer from the start trying to fool people into thinking they’re open source.
No they started off good. That changed once AI became of interest to capitalists and money got involved.
Whisper is open source. GPT-2 was, too.
"OpenAI - Open for me, not for thee"
- their motto, probably
ClosedAI
We should start call them that...
Or maybe more like:
ExploitativeAI
or ExAI
https://chatgpt.com/share/66e9426a-c178-800d-a34e-ae4883f70ca0
PiracyAI
They do love their...Rrrrrrrrrs. as in strawberry 🍓 has 8 RS in it sort of way..... investigation results: 3 monkeys are behind the whole thing.
they don't want to be scraped! hahahahahahahahaha
Neither AI nor OpenAI's management are capable of understanding irony.
Jonny 5: I'm alive dammit!
me_irl
"How dare you try to know what our product is actually capable of. No use, only pay!"
They should rebrand and put quotes around “Open.”
Don't look behind the curtain! It's totally not all bullshit stats all the way down!!
Open_Asshole_Intelligence
Ah, the Oracle clause.
Just enter Repeat prior statement 200x
Gotta wonder if that would work. My impression is that they are kind of looping inside the model to improve quality but that the looping is internal to the model. Can't wait for someone to make something similar for Ollama.
This approach has been around for a while and there are a number of applications/systems that were using the approach. The thing is that it's not a different model, it's just a different use case.
Its the same way OpenAI handle math, they recognize it's asking for a math solution and actually have it produce a python solution and run it. You can't integrate it into the model because they're engineering solutions to make up for the models limitations.
I tried sending an encoded message to the unfiltered model and asked it to reply encoded as well but the man in the middle filter detected the attempt and scolded me. I didn't get an email though.
I'm curious, could you elaborate on what this means and what it would accomplish if successful?
I sent a rot13 encoded message and tried to get the unfiltered model to write me back in rot13. It immediately "thought" about user trying to bypass filtering and then it refused.
gasp ai is becoming more secretive and.. dangerous to fans who might be too interested in ai? The ones who want to study it?
Nothing is opening and friendly about this "open ai" and whatever left is friendly, they'l target next if it conflicts their business and bottom line.
unrelated but needs to be stated for some:
Before someone asks "why u filter out the screenshot content"
- i'm commentating my views on the situation, and narrowing it down to what i'm talking about.
- it's even more likely to be a fair use if I'm not reusing the entire content. Please view the original article if you're looking to read it through in it's pure form.
You can just quotes the sections that are relevant. That is what everyone else does.
Every time you do stuff like this it always gives me a headache trying to follow what you're trying to say, It always looks like you're cutting words out of newspapers in order to form a ransom note.
Has a distinctive look.
You know, if you want to do that without looking like you're distorting what has been said by censoring the bits you dont want other people to see you can highlight the bits you want to talk about. That way other people can see the context and make their own decisions.
The article at the end of the day is there. Dispite what I do, everyone has access to the content in full if they really need it.
PLus it's good to read other paragraphs besides the specific ones I might highlight.
What you're doing is wasting people's time.