[wakana]

I am not as comfortable having a back and forth on substack than I am on HN. I am not sure as to why people who use tools like [1], [2], [3], [4] have to declare as such that the parts of the content may have been edited with help from computer tools if the end goal of conveying the information has been satisfactorily achieved. This seems like a rehashing of the "AI generated art is not real art" debate [5] again.

[1] https://huggingface.co/EleutherAI/gpt-j-6B [2] https://huggingface.co/docs/transformers/model_doc/bloom [3] https://www.jasper.ai/ [4] https://openai.com/api/ [5] https://www.nytimes.com/2022/09/02/technology/ai-artificial-...

[NetOpWibby]

We're on HN now.

Why have you deleted every comment on your post mentioning GPT-3? There were at least 4 or 5 comments mentioning it and you've deleted every one.

[wakana]

I mentioned, I am not as comfortable having a back and forth on substack than I am on HN. That is why I deleted the comments on substack, as they were not relevant to LLMs (or "GPT-3" as you like to call them)

[NetOpWibby]

> as you like to call them

Just using the same language as the deleted comments.

[ops]

Not sure about the others, but for [4], it's in their ToS:

https://openai.com/api/policies/sharing-publication/#content...