• JackGreenEarth
    link
    fedilink
    128 months ago

    I’d like this offline. Why are all the good chatbots proprietary online-only software?

    • @Amaltheamannen@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      178 months ago

      Check out /r/localllama. Preferably you need a Nvidia you with >= 24 GB VRAM but it also works with a cpu and loads of normal RAM, if you can wait a minute or two for a lengthy answer. Loads of models to choose from, many with no censorship at all. Won’t be as good as chatgptv4, but many are close to gpt3.

    • DarkThoughts
      link
      fedilink
      38 months ago

      I think KoboldAI runs locally, but like many current AI tools it’s a pain in the ass to install, especially if you’re on Linux, especially if you’re using AMD GPUs. I wonder if we’ll see some specialized AI related cards to slot into our pci ports or something. Not a whole lot of necessary options to fill them nowadays anyway. I’d also be interested in local AI voice changers too. Maybe even packaged like a Roland VT-4 voice transformer that sits between your mic & whatever audio other audio interface you might be using, where you just throw the trained voice models onto the device and it does all the real time computing for you.

      I’m sure things get more refined over the next years though.

    • @CanadaPlus
      link
      38 months ago

      By design, because they don’t want some basement guy launching skynet.

      I have to agree, I trust a handful of big shops, some of which could actually be killed by ethics people against the wishes of investors, far more than the entire internet. It still might not be enough, but there is no applying breaks whatsoever if anyone can take the next step.

      • The Doctor
        link
        fedilink
        English
        38 months ago

        They don’t want somebody toppling an oligarch, you mean.

        • @CanadaPlus
          link
          38 months ago

          Which oligarch? I mean, yes there’s definitely a degree of trusting “the right sort” there, but capitalism isn’t a team sport and they’re not a team. Honestly one of them might launch skynet anyway, if that’s how the technology grows, but a few people are theoretically able to agree not to do something, while legions never can.

          So do you think it should all be open sourced, then? And if so, are you a skeptic of “AI alignment”, or even “AI safety”?

          • The Doctor
            link
            fedilink
            English
            18 months ago

            Any of them. They don’t necessarily like each other or team up, but they are smart enough to understand that an upstart toppling one is a potential threat to all of them. All things being equal, keep the game board the way it is, without any unwelcome surprises coming in to kick things over.

            I do think it should be open sourced, just so that those of us who aren’t oligarchs have a chance to at least tread water a little longer. Those of us who aren’t wealthy need all the help we can get during a time where our inherent disposability has been writ large as a warning.

            Am I a skeptic of AI alignment? No. What I’ve observed is that AI systems tend to reflect their creators’ goals and ethics quite well. Problem is, their goals and ethics are pretty much the same as the human race’s for the last few centuries. Built in racism? No shit, it would have been strange if the construct hadn’t acted that way.

            Am I a skeptic of AI safety? Yes, I think the idea is complete bullshit. AI reflects the goals, prejudices, and ethics of its creators quite well, which if you look at human history is anything but safe and sound. To put it another way, if you’ve got the money and the chops to build an AI system, you’re going to build it to make sure you don’t lose what you have already and see if you can get hold of more of what you have (at first to recoup the cost, then just to get hold of more wealth). If you’re the military you’re going to want to make sure you’re on equal footing with your enemies, both explicit and implicit at the very least (probably half of ‘warfighting superiority’ is propaganda; if you look at the breakdowns it’s closer to equal footing with the usual margin of error).

            • @CanadaPlus
              link
              1
              edit-2
              8 months ago

              I should say that I worry a lot about some powerful person getting an obedient AI. I’d say it’s been an animating force in my life, even, although the exact way the situation has gone in this decade makes me a bit less worried. A paperclip optimiser seems like the most likely outcome right now if AI takes off, which is somewhat better.

              They don’t necessarily like each other or team up, but they are smart enough to understand that an upstart toppling one is a potential threat to all of them.

              Most of them were upstarts, though. They all come from privileged backgrounds of some kind, but didn’t start as billionares. Rather, they invested in the right thing at the right time and were carried to the top. If we were talking about a more feudal-esque system like they have in Russia, you’d be right, and that’s why Russia sucks economically and militarily, but (for now) competition meaningfully exists in the West.

              I do think it should be open sourced, just so that those of us who aren’t oligarchs have a chance to at least tread water a little longer. Those of us who aren’t wealthy need all the help we can get during a time where our inherent disposability has been writ large as a warning.

              How would that work? I have trouble seeing a way the average worker would benefit from having the ability to run an LLM offline a few years ahead of schedule. Hackers like me and probably you would a bit, but then again I’m not going to personally compete with OpenAI for reasons that have nothing to do with the software.

              What I’ve observed is that AI systems tend to reflect their creators’ goals and ethics quite well.

              That surprises me. Most of “data science”, as far as a I can tell, is struggling to get a neural net to learn what you want it to, either by trail-and-error or by inventing new training schemes. Even getting ChatGPT to only answer the questions it’s supposed to has proven elusive.

              They turn out racist, because we’re racist and so the training data is racist. Creators rarely want that, because it can bring legal trouble and certainly bad press. Sometimes they fail in ways that have nothing to do with us, like the mentioned getting ChatGPT to pretend to be an evil version of itself, which it will do because that’s a likely sequence of tokens and doesn’t look enough like something bad to a less capable system.

              I’d actually agree that AI safety is on shaky foundations sometimes, but more because we don’t know what we do want our machines to do, and more than anything I’d like the two camps to stop undercutting each other.

    • @DavidGarcia@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      18 months ago

      It won’t take long until cheap special purpose chips hit the market. Then you’ll have your offline model. There are already models that run on consumer hardware, but it’s for enthusiasts at the moment and not the same quality (but almost). But if you want to spend thousands on a PC that can handle the largest models, go ahead.