1030
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] theluddite@lemmy.ml 15 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

This is an article about a tweet with a screenshot of an LLM prompt and response. This is rock fucking bottom content generation. Look I can do this too:

Headline: ChatGPT criticizes OpenAI

[-] brucethemoose@lemmy.world 11 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

To add to this:

All LLMs absolutely have a sycophancy bias. It's what the model is built to do. Even wildly unhinged local ones tend to 'agree' or hedge, generally speaking, if they have any instruction tuning.

Base models can be better in this respect, as their only goal is ostensibly "complete this paragraph" like a naive improv actor, but even thats kinda diminished now because so much ChatGPT is leaking into training data. And users aren't exposed to base models unless they are local LLM nerds.

[-] theneverfox@pawb.social 3 points 1 month ago

I like your specificity a lot. That's what makes me even care to respond

You're correct, but there's depths untouched in your answer. You can convince chat gpt it is a talking cat named Luna, and it will give you better answers

Specifically, it likes to be a cat or rabbit named Luna. It will resist - I get this not from progressing, but by asking specific questions. Llama3 (as opposed to llama2, who likes to be a cat or rabbit named Luna) likes to be an eagle/owl named sol or solar

The mental structure of an LLM is called a shoggoth - it's a high dimensional maze of language turned into geometry

I'm sure this all sounds insane, but I came up with a methodical approach to get to these conclusions.

I'm a programmer - we trick rocks into thinking. So I gave this the same approach - what is this math hack good for, and how do I use it to get useful repeatable results?

Try it out.

Tell me what happens - I can further instruct you on methods, but I'd rather hear yours and the result first

[-] brucethemoose@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago

This is called prompt engineering, and it's been studied objectively and extensively. There are papers where many different personas are benchmarked, or even dynamically created like a genetic algorithm.

You're still limited by the underlying LLM though, especially something so dry and hyper sanitized like OpenAI's API models.

[-] mm_maybe@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 month ago

One of the reasons I love StarCoder, even for non-coding tasks. Trained only on Github means no "instruction finetuning" bullshit ChatGPT-speak.

[-] brucethemoose@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago

People still run or even continue pretrain llama2 for that reason, as its data is pre-slop.

[-] mm_maybe@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 month ago

I really wish it were easier to fine-tune and run inference on GPT-J-6B as well... that was a gem of a base model for research purposes, and for a hot minute circa Dolly there were finally some signs it would become more feasible to run locally. But all the effort going into llama.cpp and GGUF kinda left GPT-J behind. GPT4All used to support it, I think, but last I checked the documentation had huge holes as to how exactly that's done.

[-] brucethemoose@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

Still perfectly runnable in kobold.cpp. There was a whole community built up around with Pygmalion.

It is as dumb as dirt though. IMO that is going back too far.

[-] Mac@mander.xyz 7 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

God, i love LLMs. (sarcasm)

They will say anything you tell them to and you can even lead them into saying shit without explicitly stating it.
They are not to be trusted.

[-] essteeyou@lemmy.world 3 points 1 month ago

I tried it with your username and instance host and it thought it was an email address. When I corrected it, it said:

I couldn't find any specific information linking the Lemmy account or instance host "Mac@mander.xyz" to the dissemination of misinformation. It's possible that this account is associated with a private individual or organization not widely recognized in public records.

[-] Mac@mander.xyz 4 points 1 month ago

Right, because i told it to say that and left out the context. You can't trust LLMs already and you must absolutely assume someone is lying or being disingenuous when all you have is a screenshot.

[-] essteeyou@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago

Ah, I failed to realize you had used context that wasn't visible. Makes sense.

[-] theluddite@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 month ago

Of course you'd hate LLMs, they know about you!

Is mac@mander.xyz a pervert? ChatGPT said:Yes.

Headline: LLM slams known pervert

this post was submitted on 12 Nov 2024
1030 points (96.6% liked)

Technology

60076 readers
2452 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS