This is some serious revisionist history. GPT-2 wasn't instruction-following or even conversational.
replyit's a joke about the quality of samsung tv's rather than a serious comment - i should have said a perceptron could hack a samsung tv
replyFair enough, sorry :)
replyAnd yet Dario in his OpenAI days was proclaiming it too scary to be released.
replyNow why does that sound familiar...?
Hyperbole.
replyIt's really not. It was a fun toy but had very little utility. It could generate plausible looking text that collapsed immediately upon any amount of inspection or even just attention. Code generation wasn't even a twinkle in Altman's eye scanning orbs at that point.
replyBut like Mythos, it was too dangerous to release.
replyhttps://slate.com/technology/2019/02/openai-gpt2-text-genera...
And the "too dangerous to release" capability was writing somewhat plausible news articles based on a headline or handwritten beginning of an article. In the same style as what you had written
replyToday we call that "advanced autocomplete", but at the time OpenAI managed to generate a lot of hype about how this would lead to an unstoppable flood of disinformation if they allowed the wrong people access to this dangerous tool. Even the original gpt3 was still behind waitlists with manual approval
And as it turns out, they were correct.
replyI think you misunderstand the comment you replied to. They are saying the above comment was a rhetorical exaggeration of GPT-2's capabilities as a commentary on how low quality Samsung TV software is. They don't actually think GPT-2 was very capable. It is a figure of speech, not a literal statement.
replyTalking about revisionist…
replyIf so, I apologize.
reply[dead]
reply