| ▲ | Matl 4 hours ago | ||||||||||||||||
considered that by OpenAI for marketing purposes that is But yes, perhaps it would have been better for all of us if they haven't. | |||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | refulgentis 4 hours ago | parent [-] | ||||||||||||||||
In lockstep over the past month, a subset of people, un-labelable, unprompted, share this train of thought: - Mythos wasn't released widely. - But Anthropic shared info on it and said it was dangerous. - Anthropic is a company. - Companies like money. - Therefore Mythos is marketing hype. - Remember GPT-2? That also wasn't released. They said it was dangerous. - But, GPT-3, GPT-4, GPT-5, etc. were released. - Therefore GPT-2 being dangerous was marketing hype. I've seen the idea that GPT-2 not being released was marketing hype at least 6 times since Mythos was shared. It's Not Even Wrong, in the Pauli sense: they weren't selling anything! They weren't raising funding! What were they marketing!? And there's a lot more elided from history, ex. they didn't have an API yet. GPT-3 was released, a year or two later, and did have an API. But, no one used it, it wasn't good enough yet. And they did treat it as dangerous, it was wildly over-the-top manually monitored for anything resembling not-intended-use. I got permanently suspended for using the word "twink" | |||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||