[losteric]

> Despite being trained on more compute than GPT-3, AlphaGo Zero could only play Go, while GPT-3 could write essays, code, translate languages, and assist with countless other tasks. The main difference was training data.

This is kind of weird and reductive, comparing specialist to generalist models? How good is GPT3’s game of Go?

The post reads as kind of… obvious, old news padding a recruiting post? We know OpenAI started hiring the kind of specialist workers this post mentions, years ago at this point.

[rcxdude]

Also, the main showcase of the 'zero' models was that they learnt with zero training data: the only input was interacting with the rules of the game (as opposed to learning to mimic human games), which seems to be the kind of approach the article is asking for.

[9rx]

> This is kind of weird and reductive, comparing specialist to generalist models

It is even weirder when you remember that Google had already released Meena[1], which was trained on natural language...

[1] And BERT before it, but it is less like GPT.