You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments View context
14 points

Does this mean they’re not going to bother training a whole new model again? I was looking forward to seeing AI Mad Cow Disease after it consumed an Internet’s worth of AI generated content.

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

I think they will do whatever gets more investor cash

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

If you change the tokenizer you have to retrain from scratch, but you can do so with the old, unpolluted data.

It’s genius if you think about it,* you can waste energy and tell your investors it’s a new better model, while staying upstream from the river you pollute.
* at least for consultants, compute providers and other middle men.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

I remember one time in a research project I switched out the tokeniser to see what impact it might have on my output. Spent about a day re-running and the difference was minimal. I imagine it’s wholly the same thing.

*Disclaimer: I don’t actually imagine it is wholly the same thing.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

there’s a research result that the precise tokeniser makes bugger all difference, it’s almost entirely the data you put in

because LLMs are lossy compression for text

permalink
report
parent
reply

TechTakes

!techtakes@awful.systems

Create post

Big brain tech dude got yet another clueless take over at HackerNews etc? Here’s the place to vent. Orange site, VC foolishness, all welcome.

This is not debate club. Unless it’s amusing debate.

For actually-good tech, you want our NotAwfulTech community

Community stats

  • 1.5K

    Monthly active users

  • 418

    Posts

  • 11K

    Comments

Community moderators