So it got worse for creative writing, but it got much better at solving few-shot tasks. You can do information extraction from various documents with it, for example.
I mean yes, you’re right insofar as it goes. However nothing I am aware of implies technical reasons linking these two variables into a necessarily inevitable trade-off. And it’s not only creative writing that’s been hobbled; GPT3 used to be an incredibly promising academic research tool and given the right approach to prompts could uncover disparate connections between siloed fields that conventional search can only dream of.
I’m eager for OpenAi to wake up and walk back on the clumsy corporate censorship, and/or for competitors to replicate the approach and improve upon the original magic without the “bias” obsession tacked on. Real challenge though “bias” may pose in some scenarios, perhaps a better way to address this would be at the training data stage rather than clumsily gluing on an opaque approach towards poorly implemented, idealist censorship lacking in depth (and perhaps arguably, also lacking sincerity).
I’m eager for OpenAi to wake up and walk back on the clumsy corporate censorship, and/or for competitors to replicate the approach and improve upon the original magic without the “bias” obsession tacked on. Real challenge though “bias” may pose in some scenarios, perhaps a better way to address this would be at the training data stage rather than clumsily gluing on an opaque approach towards poorly implemented, idealist censorship lacking in depth (and perhaps arguably, also lacking sincerity).