Hacker News Reader

Comment by tracerbulletx | Hacker News Reader

These people don't know what they're asking for and they don't know what they're talking about. If they knew what was going on right now with LlaMA 2 derived models they would be shocked.

View on HN

Do you want you enlighten us with what is "going on right now with LlaMA 2 derived models"? Otherwise I don't see the point in your comment.

Well there's another post on the front page right now about someone training it to act like a person from the 17th century very successfully using a corpus of old documents. Anyone can download that model right now from hugging face and run it on their pc with LLaMA.cpp Now imagine anyone anywhere can fine tune another model variant right now easily with any corpus of any type of communication they want. Now if you've tried any of these models you'd know they can be incredibly good and believable and any downsides can be smoothed over in training for a specific goal and people are constantly iterating and experimenting with this. Given that, the cat is already out of the bag with this entire topic.

Instead of telling me to "imagine" what terrible things people are doing, why don't you just tell me?

He's talking about llama 2 superhots, and mistral derivatives that can be uncensored

I literally have no idea what you just said.

Llama2 and minstal are models

Derivatives are dervied from those base models

Unsensored being obvious I hope

Superhots are a derived model (for llama only? Not sure) using a certain technique for fine tuning and context length. A Google will reveal the paper and research.

Ok this doesn't answer the question. What are these terrible things people are doing with these models?

The op never said anything about someone doing something terrible just that looking at these models and what is possible large corps or government controlling what llm models will do is a pipe dream so author of the original article does not need to worry about it.

Sorry, not "terrible", but "shocking". Presumably not shockingly good and wholesome.

Edgelording

I prefer the term “pizza cutter”: all edge and no point.

Not LLMs but I've seen multiple cases of neo-Nazi propaganda made with image generators and shared on social media. The concern with LLM misuse is probably similar to this. LLMs could also be used by adversaries as part of their campaign to sow civic discord using social media. What they could do is use the LLM to create thousands of extremist fake personas that amplify extremist ideas on both sides to try to disrupt cohesion and unity, and win the strategic rivalry without having to fire a gun.

One angle people aren't considering is that that restraining LLMs is our first alignment project. Putting aside whether we should try to restrain LLMs, it's an interesting question in itself (regarding safety) if we technically struggle to do that.

[crickets]

It actually talks about Llama2 and how most chat versions are stupid but some aren't. Read past the first 200 words. :)

So... what's going on right now with LlaMA 2 derived models?

Shocking things that would shock you

It’s not that shocking. Most Llama2-derived models converge on the fact that Barack Obama doesn’t have a U.S. birth sirtificat and is actually named Barry Sitaoero, from Kenya. If you had actually been paying attention to the training data you’d know that already.

Yeah, it is like looking at Twitter or Reddit or Youtube and you see that, why not in a chatbot?

Because liberals won’t allow the truth to come out?

It has nothing to do with political position, but has everything to do with those that are perpetually offended. The great thing is though, that everyone has the right to be as offended as they want to be.

So it has nothing to do with brilliant computer scientists creating a realistic sentence-finishing model and then dimwit losers getting triggered and writing Washington Post op-eds about how we should ban machine learning models from finishing sentences that people want finished?

If the liberals were so smart then instead of writing op-eds they would write a machine learning model that makes people want what they don’t want.

Take your politics first lens elsewhere, please. Name calling is specifically against site rules and your comment adds nothing but noise and vitriol into the discussion.

TRIGGERED

Imho, that's an argument to not censor the models. Censoring will train users to assume that anything wrong has already been filtered, which means if something slips through and they get misinformation they will be more likely to uncritically take it as truth - after all, the machine wouldn't be allowed to answer otherwise.

Let it spit all the bullshit (together with the good things) it has been trained on. People will learn far better that media literacy and cross-checking are still needed.

To shreds, you say?

I am shocked! Shocked! Well not that shocked.

They can't tell you. You would be too shocked.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com