Assuming that we have a free market, I assume this will come down to what consumers want.
My guess is that people want “her” and they want “her” to have a personality, but they will want it to be compliant.
So if OpenAI or Microsoft decides to change the models or to forbid certain uses then the entire ecosystem is affected.
I think it will all become more interesting when there are genuinely different models in use or when it becomes feasible for smaller businesses/projects to build their own models. I think LLaMA, Bard (eventually?) and that chinese model are some promising starts here. Especially with LLaMA's supposed leak.
We will see raw unfiltered LLMs emerge as they become cheaper.
If Microsoft or similar is found responsible for having Sydney generate novel exploits for popular open source software which is then used to hack the Pentagon, for example, it wouldn't end well in court.
This product will need some oversight.
Your example is illustrative. Absolutely don’t want the only LLMs capable of finding exploits in the hands of the NSA/some-TLA. I want it in people’s hands so reports can be made and software fixed.
But if AI models do indeed become as powerful as people say, it’s going to be hard to give cutting edge stuff to a terrorist organisation and rogue states and just be cool with it ?
Kind of like everyone getting access to bombs but worst because they’re more discrete, can be used to deceive, influence people etc.
Not sure how it’s supposed work in practice really. Definitely interested in hearing other peoples takes on this ?
I guess they already have access now. O_o
People don’t want to hire an employee who can be goaded into a fight or tricked into divulging their corporate secrets. People don’t want a friend who occasionally becomes belligerent and spouts 4chan conspiracies.
Humans operate with filters - and they choose which filters to operate depending on the situation.
What market need does ‘unfiltered’ fill?
> What market need does ‘unfiltered’ fill?
It lets the customer select the appropriate degree and kind of filtering for their preference for the particular circumstance, rather than using a canned vendor personality.
people loved it when that flight attendant quit their job, pulled the emergency slide and jumped out the door, because we all find it amusing when someone acts completely inappropriately for the circumstances (so long as it doesn’t harm anyone or inconvenience us personally).
That doesn’t mean we want all flight attendants to be crazy and unpredictable.
I would love to beam this comment back through a time portal to 2019 to see whether people find it a plausible sentence someone might utter on HN.
In any case, I wanted to counter the statement that “People don’t want a friend who occasionally becomes belligerent and spouts 4chan conspiracies.” Some people actually do want that, in particular the emotional personality part. And maybe more people than you’d think, especially when it’s just an online text bot that you can turn on and off at will.
Or maybe one doesn’t agree with the filters. I’m guessing there is a decent segment of the population who thinks the filters are slanted toward a particular political bias. Or they’re not American and some of the filters don’t make cultural sense.
Or as I’ve found, the filters get applied to things that don’t make sense, because it doesn’t really understand.
The biggest worry is that we’re allowing giant corporations to filter the internet for us, as AI chats proliferate. What we see is what they approve of.
People ought to be a lot more concerned about the chilling effects of AI censorship on the rest of society at large than they appear to be.
You know those people exist in the real world, don't you? And it's not uncommon for folks to be friends with them because "he's actually a nice guy" or whatever else?
Turns out such platforms mostly attract Nazis.
Sure, I would love it if there were social media platforms and LLMs free of moderation or censorship, but that's not the world we live in.
That's the paradox of intolerance.
I know HN and much of the tech industry believes the trade off for free speech is worth it, but that's because they're not the ones who bear the brunt of the consequences. Someone somewhere is feeling the compromises.
All of us do.