Загрузка видео...

Не удалось загрузить видео

На главную

Thx to Scott Aaronson, GPT outputs will soon be watermarked w/ a random seed, making it much harder to submit your GPT-written homework without getting caught He doesn’t give too many details about how it works, but I suspect its possible to bypass using a clever decoding strat

548,543 просмотров • 3 лет назад •via X (Twitter)

Комментарии: 10

Фото профиля James Campbell
James Campbell3 лет назад

Src:

Фото профиля David Deutsch
David Deutsch3 лет назад

@mezaoptimizer Anything that can be subverted by the use of AI, should not qualify as education.

Фото профиля Smoke-away
Smoke-away3 лет назад

@mezaoptimizer This feels like making people still work in a post-scarcity world.

Фото профиля James Campbell
James Campbell3 лет назад

In near term, I think it could very beneficial in some applications, e.g. detecting a propaganda campaign

Фото профиля Jeffrey Emanuel
Jeffrey Emanuel3 лет назад

@mezaoptimizer Some other company will make a product whose sole purpose will be to strategically modify the generated text to corrupt or otherwise defeat the watermark, either by changing words to synonyms when it won’t change meaning, or recasting sentence structure, or reordering things, etc

Фото профиля James Campbell
James Campbell3 лет назад

Yeah I could probably build this..

Фото профиля Joshua Levy
Joshua Levy3 лет назад

@mezaoptimizer More explained here. It seems, as he describes, that it will be possible to circumvent by using a different LLM to paraphrase the output of GPT. I expect this will be a possibly useful signal but not a reliable one.

Фото профиля James Campbell
James Campbell3 лет назад

Thanks for the thread!

Фото профиля Christoph Molnar 🦋 christophmolnar.bsky.social
Christoph Molnar 🦋 christophmolnar.bsky.social3 лет назад

@mezaoptimizer Naive question: Couldnt this be circumvented by automated post-processing? Like swapping out synonyms, post-processing with another LLM, adding spelling errors?

Фото профиля James Campbell
James Campbell3 лет назад

Yes, depends on how the watermark is designed, but all those listed should work to dilute the signal (although perhaps not entirely)

Похожие видео

GPT-5.6 vs GPT-5.5 on my custom spaceship prompt. I gave both models the exact same custom prompt. This is also the same prompt I previously gave to Fable 5. For context, GPT-5.6 Pro worked for 87 minutes, while GPT-5.5 Extra High worked for 34 minutes and 42 seconds. As I’ve said before, based on great authority GPT-5.6 will be an incremental/soldi improvement over GPT-5.5, not a “Fable killer.” My rough expectation has been that it would trade blows with Fable 5 on some benchmarks, maybe win around half depending on the category, but not clearly surpass it overall. And again fable five will have bigger model smell, but this was expected. After testing this coding output, that view feels pretty accurate. GPT-5.6 is clearly better than GPT-5.5 in several visual areas. The lighting, shading, chairs, object details, and exterior of the spaceship looked noticeably stronger. The scene was also easier to test. I do want to give GPT-5.5 credit though. It built out the rooms much much better and the planets looked better than GPT-5.6’s. It was also interesting that both GPT-5.5 and GPT-5.6 produced better-looking planets than Fable 5 in this specific test. The downside with GPT-5.5 was stability. The game was much glitchier and harder to test compared to GPT-5.6. But when it comes to the core of the demo, which is the spaceship itself, Fable 5 still beat both models pretty comfortably. GPT-5.6 is impressive, but from this test, it looks exactly like what I expected which was a meaningful incremental improvement over GPT-5.5, at least for indie game demos, but not something that replaces Fable 5. In collaboration with Chetaslua

Chris

250,405 просмотров • 1 месяц назад