[joe_the_user]

If you say OpenAI will only approve applications for "zero stakes", domains, then you are saying what the parent is saying - it's entirely for entertainment.

If you claim there's some "low but not zero" stakes application, I'd like to know what that is. I mean, it seems clear that if someone asks a GTP-3 customer service bot "so what should I do now", there's a reasonable probability that the bot would say "throw your product in the garbage and buy [competitor X]", since you can find that commentary on the Internet (true or not). That's not a life and death event but whatever stakes you have in that bot, it's thrown them away.

[eghad]

I never said zero stakes? There are clear instances where a a 1 or 0 shot transformer can have benefits beyond entertainment--topic modeling and named entity recognition for instance (I'm on the team that believes that human-in-the-loop systems will always outperform solo systems on their own and that GPT-3 alone does not confer any competitive advantage). If you think that chatbots are the only user facing use-case for a transformer, then frankly that's on you falling for the hype surrounding its language generation performance.

OpenAI knows GPT-3 is not sophisticated enough to perform medical diagnosis or analysis (anyone can look at how Watson failed), so it'd never approve such a risky application.

[peterwoerner]

I would saw that copy.ai is a low but not zero stakes application. It develops a draft of copy for ads, landing pages etc. which you can review before taking live.

[joe_the_user]

Sure, I can see "low stakes plus human review" sounds doable but not that much a evolute from "no stakes".