🏅 Top traders

@hyperion For once, someone's claims of "this was super obvious" are actually backed up by their bets before the information was publicly known! Well done. :)

@IsaacKing Only reason I pulled out earlier was because another GPT-4 market was at 30% and I didn't have enough liquidity for both. Easy $$$$

@Mira your account is still deleted though 🥴

@IsaacKing plz do it, need liquidity

@MichaelKlyachman
"We are happy to confirm that the new Bing is running on GPT-4, customized for search. If you’ve used the new Bing in preview at any time in the last six weeks, you’ve already had an early look at the power of OpenAI’s latest model."

The new Bing launched Feb 7, which is more than 6 full weeks prior to this statement, or 5 full weeks and two partial weeks. This implies that it not only is GPT-4 now, but has been since launch.

@JimHays bet this is straight up an attention grabbing lie, but you never know. feels weird that OpenAI clearly states that the free usage tier of GPT-4 will be more limited than GPT3 was. But then again, it's no longer a for-profit org, is it... 😢

@rkn Wanna actually bet on that?

@IsaacKing not really, I already did lol. In hindsight it's perfectly reasonable for Microsoft to pay (or already $10B) as Bing desperately needs market share vs Google ^^ Good thing OpenAI "... rolled out the ability to purchase ChatGPT Plus internationally." in yesterdays release notes for chatgpt, you know, since they're only letting Plus-users use GPT4 (free use not yet known) 😂

@rkn So you think this market should resolve NO, because Bing was not using GPT-4 at the time of release, and is now switching it over and lying about having always been using it?

I'm willing to seriously consider this possibility if you seriously believe it, but the fact that you have not bought a bunch of NO at such incredibly good odds for you makes me think you don't seriously hold this belief and are just trolling.

@IsaacKing while I think it's *possible*, I really don't think should resolve to no as long as MS states that Bing has been running gpt4 all along. Unless they walk it back somehow

not trolling got my shares earlier than this (~60-70% iirc) so imma realize this loss

@IsaacKing I think this is implausible because Bing was clearly more advanced than ChatGPT. There was little doubt if it uses some other better model, it was just not clear if it was GPT-4 or GPT-3.6 or something like this.

@ValeryCherepanov also, it is plausible that Bing used GPT-4 from the start because GPT-4 existed for months already (this is not rumors, it is what the official OpenAI post says).

@rkn Ok, I'm going to resolve this YES without further research unless you or someone else wants to provide a serious counterargument within the next few minutes.

@Butanium I've used the gpt3.5 API and these "system" messages, seeing as they just announced a waitlist for GPT-4... I don't think Bing has been running anything more than a "custom" 3.5 build

@rkn apparently microsoft says otherwise, guess we know why Bing's version was so shoddy (less tested/poor bing system prompts/???)

@grahambo GPT-4 is rumored to have trillions of parameters, which means it's orders of magnitude more computationally expensive than ChatGPT or GPT-3 is. Which means there's no way they are scaling that for people to use it for FREE

@grahambo The trillion parameters ba has been debunked by Sam Altaman himself. The GPT-4 models won’t be much bigger than the GPT-3.5 ones

@R2D2 *trilion parameters bs.

@R2D2 Damn that's confusing. Still though, people seem to think Bing will be getting GPT-4 before OpenAI does lmao

@grahambo I don’t know about that. Since Microsoft paid very good money, they might demand to be the first to release it. We don’t know the details of their commercial agreement. Anyway, that doesn’t matter for what it concerns this market. “Resolves based on what Bing was running on at the time of market creation” and there’s no way GPT-4 was out already when this market was created.

@R2D2 Bing could have been running on a prerelease of GPT-4. Scott Alexander thinks this is the case and thinks they just fumbled it because they were less technically competent than OpenAI expected them to be. But he's not an AI expert.

@grahambo OAI already has access to GPT-4 and plan to publicly release it soon. It is a smaller model as well

@JacyAnthis Exactly -- whether some OpenAI product release gets touted as "GPT-4" or something else is a marketing question, not a technical one, and as you say it doesn't seem to be to OpenAI's advantage to claim early Bing as GPT-4 regardless of where Sydney's latest weights came from. Though, had things played out differently, without so much high-profile unhinged-itude, maybe it would have been.

@MaximLott

https://blogs.microsoft.com/blog/2023/02/07/reinventing-search-with-a-new-ai-powered-microsoft-bing-and-edge-your-copilot-for-the-web/

“It takes key learnings and advancements from ChatGPT and GPT-3.5 – and it is even faster, more accurate and more capable.”

@Milli I don’t think people generally thought it was the base version of GPT-3. GPT-3.5 seems like a better baseline for 0.

@LeoSpitz I believe that person on Twitter has misread Gwern's comment on LW. It doesn't say that Gwern talked to Mikhail, just that someone told Gwern it's not GPT-4, and that Mikhail is in charge of deployment.

That's the same comment this market updated on on February 20th, so no new information there.

@IsaacKing You're right, just seeing that he has linked to that LW post as his source.

https://twitter.com/Teknium1/status/1633170248743661578

@mkualquiera this market is about model at the time of market creation, so this is (i guess) evidence that it was probably not gpt4 before.

@Lavander I believe that @Techinfoeditor is drawing a comparison between the original ChatGPT and not a previous version of Bing.

@NoaNabeshima I think if it uses GPT-4 for more complicated or challenging queries, that should count.

@IsaacKing That should not count. The question is "Is Bing's chatbot GPT-4?" and not "Does Bing's chatbot use GPT-4 in any way shape or form". You should make a new question if you have a different intent as these 2 questions have differing answers.

@RahulShah I don't see a meaningful difference between a chatbot "using" vs. "being" a specific language model.

@IsaacKing It is being a smart-alec. It clearly thinks it is GPT-4 plus some layer on top, and if that's true the market should resolve Yes.

But I don't understand how it does reasoning about itself, so this answer might be just hallucination.

@RobinGreen Oh I'm sure it is hallucination. There's no reason its training data or prompt would include such information about itself.

@R2D2 Yes, at the time of market creation. I'll edit the description.

@IsaacKing Potential for a bounty if this ends up mattering

@JimHays Someone else already mentioned it below and I provided a clarification, so I don't think this one qualifies.

@StrayClimb no clue, the person deleted their account as well so this smells lowkey fishy lmao

@VictorLi "the person deleted their account" - which person are you referring to?

@RobinGreen Mira, the current highest YES shareholder who was responsible for the temporary spike to 75%. when i click onto their profile it just says deleted

@VictorLi weird. i saw this in my feed just now. when i click though, it also says deleted.

@higherLEVELING My guess is that they deleted their account (after that legendary market https://manifold.markets/levifinkelstein/will-this-market-be-in-the-interval).

This would mean that their user profile is deleted. However, it's possible that manifold did not delete the user's API key, only their profile/personal data, which is why the user can bet in a programatic fashion.

They don't delete the (for example) comment data (or trading history on markets that the user bet on) of that user either:

Probably to avoid a lot of [deleted]-[deleted] comments from a lot of different markets that the user had commented on?

@firstuserhere I don't believe the account is deleted though. They liked the comment i just wrote above.

@higherLEVELING witchcraft!

@higherLEVELING yea they just liked my comment as well lmao wtf

@VictorLi Mira is the ghost of Manifold. Dead but not gone...

@IsaacKing so much for taking a break from manifold 😂

@Charlie I think the ambiguous "closer" criterion is the cause of most contestation. I would personally be more excited about a market that just resolves YES if Microsoft or OpenAI explicitly say that ChatGPT, as it was in February 2023, is based on GPT-4, and resolves NO otherwise. This has downsides, such as that F23-ChatGPT could be based on GPT-4 but Microsoft and OpenAI never get around to mentioning that. Personally, I think the unambiguous resolution would outweigh those downsides.

@JacyAnthis perhaps you can create that market. I’m sure @IsaacKing would welcome it, and I’d be interested in seeing any discrepancies.

@JacyAnthis I think that would end up being pretty similar to this one

@hyperion Note that "much more powerful than GPT-3.5" is probably a lower bar than question resolution. Bing's chatbot needs to be closer to GPT-4 than "GPT-3 and its derivatives such as Codex and ChatGPT," and, presumably, ChatGPT is already (much) more powerful than GPT-3.5.

@JacyAnthis nope. 1) GPT-3.5 is not a single model but a series of models https://platform.openai.com/docs/model-index-for-researchers/models-referred-to-as-gpt-3-5 2) the last one of this models (text-davinci-003) was trained with PPO, the same way ChatGPT was trained https://openai.com/blog/chatgpt/ so there’s really no evidence at all that ChatGPT is more powerful than GPT 3.5

@JacyAnthis Really? "much more powerful than 3.5" is exactly what we're expecting to get from GPT-4, expecting anything more is a bit silly. ChatGPT is GPT-3.5.

@StrayClimb

@StrayClimb 1) Davinci is (one of the iterations of) GPT-3, not GPT-4 https://platform.openai.com/docs/models/overview 2) ChatGPT already has a context of 8k, so that’s nothing to be impressed about 3) 32k, now this sounds a bit more peculiar. However if GPT-4 is going to be a multi-trillion parameters model, as rumored, with many optimizations over GPT-3.5, then this isn’t it at all.

Re this

@Mqrius It could easily claim to be the Pope, but that’s not evidence it’s the Pope. These models lie like there’s no tomorrow. A non-technical intro: https://noahpinion.substack.com/p/why-does-chatgpt-constantly-lie

@PippoPluto do you mean evidence in the yes/no sense, or evidence in the Bayesian update sense? Because it's definitely the latterz even if it's weak. In the world where Sydney is based on GPT-4, she's more likely to say so than in the world where she's not. But I agree that in the world where she's not based on GPT-4, it's still plausible for her to say she is. Just a bit less plausible.

@Mqrius I meant in the yes/no sense, but even in the Bayesian update sense, P(claims to be GPT-4| it’s GPT-4) is not necessarily higher than P(claims to be GPT-4| it’s not GPT-4). Because of the LM objective (“predict the next token”), these models tell you what you want to hear. They’re trained to sound plausible, not to tell the truth. Have a look at the link I shared.

@LeoSpitz Or never release a GPT-4 at all.

@LeoSpitz They will, since they’re now under high pressure to actually become profitable, given the huge investment made by Microsoft (who will be claiming their ROI). But no one knows when.

@PippoPluto As of market creation.

@Stefan i couldn't confirm if this is a official account and to be honest it screams a fake account

@ShortStick It's real, see the other comments below.

@Stefan

They have changed the underlying model a number of times.