[stu2b50]

I don’t see why there’s outrage. Facebook released both the raw models and a few fine tuned on chat prompts for a reason. In many commercial cases, safer is better.

But you don’t want that? No problem. That’s why the raw model weights are there. It’s easy to fine tune it to your needs, like the blogpost shows.

[Xelbair]

It's just not safe. It's unusable. you can't ask it normal questions to not get stonewalled by it's default censorship message - it wouldn't even work for commercial case.

[hot_gril]

Seems fine for most commercial use cases. Got a tech support chat bot? It doesn't need to be answering questions about religion. Also, corporate environments already tend to be super politically correct. There's already a long list of normal words I can't say at work.

[all2]

Can you post that list here?

[hot_gril]

No can do, but https://developers.google.com/style/word-list seems to have all of them and more, except that it's missing "hooray." One funny red-exclamation-mark example from this public list is "smartphone."

Some are recommended against just cause of spelling or something, but anything that says to use a more "precise" term seems to mean it's considered offensive, kinda like in The Giver.

[mzs]

Here's another one: https://s.wsj.net/public/resources/documents/stanfordlanguag...

BTW hooray is okay there, but 'hip-hip-hooray is discouraged. Germans said hep hep in the hep-hep pogrom of the early 1800s and might have said 'hep hep hurra' during the 3rd Reich. It cuts too closely though, personally I just use bravo to avoid any trouble.

[hot_gril]

At least Stanford's rules were retracted.

About hip hip, I ended up looking into that when I saw it back then. The connection to the early 1800s riots was made by a single journalist back then, and it was most likely false. More importantly, nobody really makes that connection unless they're trying to.

[cooper_ganglia]

Adhering to that list seems exhausting…

[smoldesu]

I wholly disagree. This is arguably close to the perfect solution:

- Developers and end users can choose which model they want to use

- Model distributors don't necessarily take the fall since they provide a "healthy" model alternative

- The uncensored "base" model can be finetuned into whatever else is needed

You have to remember, ChatGPT is censored like a Soviet history book but didn't struggle to hit hundreds of millions of users in months. This is what releases will look like from now on, and it's not even a particularly damning example.

[cosmojg]

I saw them as demos rather than finished products. Kinda like, "Look, you can chat tune these if you want to."

[bilsbie]

Aren’t the raw model weights after RFHF?

[stu2b50]

Nope. Raw models are purely trained on their corpus of text in an autoregressive manor. No chat fine tuning or rlhf.