Recent comments in /f/MachineLearning

ThePogromist OP t1_jdvfv8r wrote

Reply to comment by sEi_ in My ChatGPT Chrome Extension that saves conversations in .md files is finally approved by the Chrome Web Store. It's still and so will continue to be Open Source. [P] by ThePogromist

>Sorry I do not read or understand Russian.

Ну я то тебя понимаю, и даже указал тебе на английском, на возможность использовать что гугл переводчик, что DeepL.

Это не моя проблема что англоязычные лицемеры, ратующие за мультукультурность и равенство, натыкаются на непосильную задачу изучения жаргонов и мемов других культур.

−8

tamilupk OP t1_jdvecc3 wrote

Reply to comment by killerfridge in [D] Will prompting the LLM to review it's own answer be any helpful to reduce chances of hallucinations? I tested couple of tricky questions and it seems it might work. by tamilupk

That's an interesting thought, for the example prompts at least I tested without the review prompt, it gave out the same answer unless I add "think step by step" at the end of the question. I will test more on this.

4

tamilupk OP t1_jdve17f wrote

Reply to comment by yaosio in [D] Will prompting the LLM to review it's own answer be any helpful to reduce chances of hallucinations? I tested couple of tricky questions and it seems it might work. by tamilupk

Yeah, Bing seems too sensitive, it will close the conversation right away if you even ask for clarification the second time. But my intention is to use the chatGPT api, let's see how it works.
Don't even get me started on Bard, it was a huge disappointment for me, I had big expectations even after that paris event. I am saying this being a fan of google products and also it's researches.
I still have hopes that at least their PaLM model to come close to GPT4.

1

sEi_ t1_jdvdr8j wrote

Reply to comment by ThePogromist in My ChatGPT Chrome Extension that saves conversations in .md files is finally approved by the Chrome Web Store. It's still and so will continue to be Open Source. [P] by ThePogromist

Sorry I do not read or understand Russian.

The username is not "jargonism" but "ThePogromist" that any search, in any search engine will return as the first response, namely the answer I posted, if they even tell about other definitions/meanings/jargons at all.

That the word in your world can have another meaning I can not see change anything in this sphere.

If you where aware of the official [english] interpretation when picking that nick, then it is still 'fishy' at least.

But whatever I'm not loosing sleep over this.

----

Or as my friend said (GPT word spew alert):

Prompt:

>What is the obvious interpretation of the username "ThePogromist" aka pogromist?

Response:

>The term "pogrom" refers to an organized, often officially encouraged massacre or persecution of a particular ethnic or religious group, particularly Jews. Historically, pogroms have occurred in various countries, most notably in Russia and Eastern Europe. The term "pogromist" would be someone who participates in or advocates for such violence or persecution.
>
>Given this context, the username "ThePogromist" carries a negative connotation, as it seems to imply an association with or endorsement of such violence and persecution. However, as mentioned earlier, it's important to keep in mind that people choose usernames for various reasons, and the intended meaning might not always align with the obvious interpretation.

2

tamilupk OP t1_jdvcsyz wrote

Reply to comment by timelyparadox in [D] Will prompting the LLM to review it's own answer be any helpful to reduce chances of hallucinations? I tested couple of tricky questions and it seems it might work. by tamilupk

My prompt in the system might be misleading, but my aim was to review only the reasoning answers like the ones listed in the screenshot. A significant portion answers that needs reasoning getting corrected this way.

1

ThePogromist OP t1_jdvcdh2 wrote

Reply to My ChatGPT Chrome Extension that saves conversations in .md files is finally approved by the Chrome Web Store. It's still and so will continue to be Open Source. [P] by ThePogromist

Cultural and linguistic lessons with GPT-4:

A jargonism is a term or expression that is specific to a particular profession, field, or group of people. Jargon often consists of specialized language, abbreviations, or terms that can be difficult for people outside the group to understand. Jargon is typically used to facilitate communication among members of the same profession or field, as it allows them to convey complex ideas more efficiently. However, it can also be confusing or exclusionary to those not familiar with the specific jargon.
Words can have more than one meaning, both offensive and neutral, due to various factors such as cultural, historical, and linguistic contexts. Language is constantly evolving, and words may gain or lose meanings over time. Different meanings can arise from changes in society, the need for new expressions to describe new ideas or experiences, or the adoption of terms from other languages. This can result in a single word having multiple meanings, sometimes with different connotations depending on the context in which it is used.
The Russian term "погромист" (pogromist) is a good example of a word with multiple meanings. In general, a "погромист" is someone who participates in a pogrom, which is a violent riot aimed at the persecution or massacre of a particular ethnic or religious group, often motivated by hatred or prejudice. This meaning carries a strong negative connotation.
However, in Russian programming jargon, a "погромист" is a programmer who tends to write messy or unoptimized code, without proper documentation or structure, often leading to bugs or issues in the software. This meaning is more neutral and is used humorously or critically among programmers to describe a colleague whose coding practices are less than ideal.
It is important to recognize the context in which the word "погромист" is used to determine its meaning. In the historical context, the term refers to a participant in violent acts against a specific group, while in programming jargon, it refers to a programmer with poor coding practices. By understanding the context and the audience, you can avoid confusion and misinterpretation.

−2

tamilupk OP t1_jdvcasr wrote

Reply to comment by andreichiffa in [D] Will prompting the LLM to review it's own answer be any helpful to reduce chances of hallucinations? I tested couple of tricky questions and it seems it might work. by tamilupk

Thanks, I was not aware of it before. I believe you are referring the below,

>For closed-domain hallucinations, we are able to use GPT-4 itself to generate synthetic data.Specifically, we design a multi-step process to generate comparison data:
>
>1. Pass a prompt through GPT-4 model and get a response
>
>2. Pass prompt + response through GPT-4 with an instruction to list all hallucinations(a) If no hallucinations are found, continue
>
>3. Pass prompt + response + hallucinations through GPT-4 with an instruction to rewrite theresponse without hallucinations
>
>4. Pass prompt + new response through GPT-4 with an instruction to list all hallucinations
>
>(a) If none are found, keep (original response, new response) comparison pair
>
>(b) Otherwise, repeat up to 5x

10

Upstairs-Youth5483 t1_jdvcahh wrote

Reply to [D] GPT4 and coding problems by enryu42

I find got, as a coder, to be very useful for doing my repetitive coding tasks. For example taking a sql table def making very basic cruds, making the classes that call the procs.

It does have a long way to go but it has the illusion of consciousness in that it does remember what you said with somewhat understanding of what you said.

I have caught it making up settings that don’t exist and every line of code should be properly scrutinized.

1

suflaj t1_jdvbyog wrote

Reply to [D] Build a ChatGPT from zero by manuelfraile

With the constraints you have I'm afraid the best you could do is:

  • find a person who can quickly copy and paste prompts
  • give them internet access
  • pay for ChatGPT Plus
  • have them copy user prompts into ChatGPT and copy its answer to the user
1