this post was submitted on 04 Dec 2023
849 points (98.0% liked)

Technology

59389 readers
3688 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] MNByChoice@midwest.social 24 points 11 months ago (3 children)

Any idea what such things cost the company in terms of computation or electricity?

[–] Daxtron2@startrek.website 61 points 11 months ago (2 children)

That's not the reason, it's because it was seemingly outputting training data (or at least data that looks like it could be training data)

[–] MNByChoice@midwest.social 19 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)

Sure, but this cannot be free.

Edit: oh, are you suggesting it is the normal cost? Nuts, chathpt is not repeating forever.

[–] nickwitha_k@lemmy.sdf.org 2 points 11 months ago

I think that they were referring to the exploit that was recently published. Google researchers were able to reliably get the LLM to output training data verbatim, including PII.

To me, this reads as damage control for that. Especially as they are being sued for copyright infringement, which they and their proponents have been claiming is impossible (clearly, they were either wrong or lying).

[–] regbin_@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)

It's definitely cost. There are other ways to make it generate text that is similar to training data without needing it to endlessly repeat words so I doubt OpenAI cares in that aspect.

[–] Daxtron2@startrek.website 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

It doesn't endlessly repeat, there's a cap on token generation per request. It absolutely is because of the recent "exploit"

[–] regbin_@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago

I don't think they would care if it didn't get popular and having thousands of people trying it out, eating up huge amount of compute resources.

It's a known quirk of LLMs.

[–] kromem@lemmy.world 2 points 11 months ago

You're correct.

While costs are tracked per token, behind the scenes the longer the response the more it costs to continue generating, so millions of users suddenly thinking they are clever replicating what they read getting it to max output tokens is a substantial increase in underlying costs.

The DeepMind researchers were likely doing that by API call, which they were at least paying for on a per token basis.

And the terms hasn't been updated to prevent it, they've always had this item as prohibited:

Attempt to or assist anyone to reverse engineer, decompile or discover the source code or underlying components of our Services, including our models, algorithms, or systems (except to the extent this restriction is prohibited by applicable law).

[–] merc@sh.itjust.works -3 points 11 months ago (3 children)

Essentially nothing. Repeating a word infinite times (until interrupted) is one of the easiest tasks a computer can do. Even if millions of people were making requests like this it would cost OpenAI on the order of a few hundred bucks, out of an operational budget of tens of millions.

The expensive part of AI is training the models. Trained models are so cheap to run that you can do it on your cell phone if you're interested.

[–] ExLisper@linux.community 7 points 11 months ago (1 children)

What? They are not just generating this word in a loop. The model still calculates probability for each repetition, just like for any other query. It's as expensive as other queries which is definitely not free.

[–] merc@sh.itjust.works -1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

The model still calculates probability for each repetition

Which is very cheap.

as expensive as other queries which is definitely not free

It's still very cheap, that's why they allow people to play with the LLMs. It's training them that's expensive.

[–] ExLisper@linux.community 2 points 11 months ago

Yes, it's not expensive but saying that it's 'one of the easiest tasks a computer can do' is simply wrong. It's not like it's concatenates strings, it's still performing complicated calculations using on of the most advanced AI techniques known today and each query can be 1000x times more expensive than a google search. It's cheap because a lot of things at scale are cheap but pretty much any other publicly available API on the internet is 'easier' than this one.

[–] apinanaivot@sopuli.xyz 4 points 11 months ago (1 children)

GPT4 definitely isn't cheap to run.

[–] merc@sh.itjust.works 3 points 11 months ago

Depends how you define "cheap". They're orders of magnitude cheaper to run than they are to train.

[–] Zeshade@lemmy.world 3 points 11 months ago

Well it depends what user experience and quality you are after. Some of Meta's Llama 2 models require several GBs of GPU ram to run and be responsive.