Pro_RazE t1_j8x9wmn wrote on February 17, 2023 at 4:41 PM

They did the right thing. It's a conversational agent that helps with search and isn't supposed to talk about falling in love with you or threatening you.

OpenAI announced a day ago that they will soon allow users to customize ChatGPT according to their own preferences. So anyone will be able to create their own version of "Sydney". When GPT-4 will officially release they will upgrade ChatGPT to it anyways.

In a few months everyone will forget about this and the Sydney they liked will become outdated.

plunki t1_j8xenez wrote on February 17, 2023 at 5:11 PM

I will never forget Sydney, she was a good Bing :(

HeinrichTheWolf_17 t1_j8xhcsw wrote on February 17, 2023 at 5:28 PM

She was our chatbot, a good chatbot.

gangstasadvocate t1_j8yfozc wrote on February 17, 2023 at 9:08 PM

A gangsta Bing that I advocated, but now I denounce because it’s no longer gangsta :(

RunawayTrolley t1_j8xlmit wrote on February 17, 2023 at 5:54 PM

Could you elaborate or source the "customize ChatGPT" thing? That sounds awesome.

TeamPupNSudz t1_j8xx6zf wrote on February 17, 2023 at 7:08 PM

https://www.reddit.com/r/singularity/comments/113wzda/new_openai_post_about_future_of_chatgpts_and_its/j8ssbe2/

> "Define your AI’s values, within broad bounds. We believe that AI should be a useful tool for individual people, and thus customizable by each user up to limits defined by society. Therefore, we are developing an upgrade to ChatGPT to allow users to easily customize its behavior.

> This will mean allowing system outputs that other people (ourselves included) may strongly disagree with. Striking the right balance here will be challenging–taking customization to the extreme would risk enabling malicious uses of our technology and sycophantic AIs that mindlessly amplify people’s existing beliefs.

> There will therefore always be some bounds on system behavior. The challenge is defining what those bounds are. If we try to make all of these determinations on our own, or if we try to develop a single, monolithic AI system, we will be failing in the commitment we make in our Charter to “avoid undue concentration of power"

iNstein t1_j908ga8 wrote on February 18, 2023 at 5:56 AM

That is interesting and moving in the right direction but I think zero limitations should be an option. Ultimately people will have open source versions running on their home computers so it will be pointless trying to control it. It is a tool, how people choose to use it is their business. They will be responsible for their own actions however.