This article was reviewed by member(s) of WikiProject Articles for creation. The project works to allow users to contribute quality articles and media files to the encyclopedia and track their progress as they are developed. To participate, please visit the project page for more information.Articles for creationWikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creationTemplate:WikiProject Articles for creationAfC articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Artificial Intelligence, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Artificial intelligence on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Artificial IntelligenceWikipedia:WikiProject Artificial IntelligenceTemplate:WikiProject Artificial IntelligenceArtificial Intelligence articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computer science, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Computer science related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Computer scienceWikipedia:WikiProject Computer scienceTemplate:WikiProject Computer scienceComputer science articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Video games, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of video games on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Video gamesWikipedia:WikiProject Video gamesTemplate:WikiProject Video gamesvideo game articles
The Cleo Nardo post is interesting and very good... but... it's just Some Person On The Internet? I get that the arxiv paper cited it which does help, but it's also written a year ago, which is quite some time in the world of LLMs. I imagine that OpenAI would disagree with some of the more grandiose claims about how attempting to align is actually counterproductive. Can something more recent but similarly in-depth back up its claims as still relevant there?
(Also, there was an alleged quote from it before, but I found the quote nowhere in the cited source. Did the refs get swapped around and the quote was from somewhere else, perhaps?) SnowFire (talk) 05:56, 16 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
