|
|
|
|
|
|
by uLogMicheal
1066 days ago
|
|
|
Your response does two things -- Dismisses the countless examples given, from me in this thread/my comment history, and many other people in many threads on this website and Reddit. Dismisses the pretense that certain people get access to unfiltered models under the guise of conspiracy. In the sparks of AGI paper from Microsoft, the researcher mentions the differences in private/test models versus the ones prepped for consumers. If you want a hard to ignore visual example, just look at the unicorn they drew for that paper and then look at https://gpt-unicorn.adamkdean.co.uk/. I hope you can add to these discussions rather than primarily be dismissive. This is not conspiracy, we do not know the intention behind the changes and I am not speculating on the intentions of the actors. Sparks of AGI: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2303.12712.pdf |
|
|
The unicorns, in my perspective, don't appear to have had any notable changes. It's interesting though, that we're assessing a language bot based on its ability to generate a drawing. After reviewing the blog post linked, I agree with the author's observation that there don't seem to be any significant alterations in the unicorn.
Indeed, there are numerous instances of developers experimenting with prompt engineering, discovering what methods work best.
However, I find it difficult to regard this as anything more than speculation for now.