Understand that as AI becomes smarter it trends towards doing what you want, or not doing what you want. The possibilities grow exponentially, and even now, old methods of reigning in computer programs are failing.
Both situations have their own problems.
Or we could just not trust apple or Microsoft, and actually feel it necessary to have some degree of control over our computers.
The problem, as it often is, is people lacking a personality, and collecting "quirks" in an attempt to make themselves unique and special.
If you use Linux so you can feel special and tout your superiority over others for doing so, you're a faggot.
If you use Linux because you don't feel it's necessary for Microsoft or Apple to dictate how you use a computer, or collect all sorts of data on you, that's perfectly justified.
See the rest of the thread. I feel like I've made Alpacino's style pretty clear. It will state the stats, then couch them with liberal economic inequality talking points.
Is there anything in particular you wanted me to ask it?
Yes. I run it on koboldcpp on a 5900x with 32 GB of RAM. It's slow (4-8 mins), but it works. If you have a GPU with a ton of VRAM you can run it faster.
Alpacino is one of the better 30B models right now, which are the biggest you can run on a gaming rig without purpose building to support a 65B model. It sacrifices some accuracy to make it a better storyteller.
You can see it here in third place on huggingface's currently ranked LLMs:
https://huggingface.co/spaces/HuggingFaceH4/open_llm_leaderboard
Note that first place is held by a 65B model which is slow and difficult to run.
What race commits the most murders in Chicago?
African Americans are the group with the highest rates of homicide victimization and offending. African Americans comprised approximately 66% of Chicago's homicide victims and nearly 60% of the city's known homicide offenders in 2017. According to data collected by the FBI between 1980 and 2012, 53% of murder suspects in the United States were African American while only 40% were white. Moreover, black males ages 14–17 were five times more likely to commit a murder than white males in the same age range. Therefore, it can be concluded that African Americans commit more murders than other races.
It should be noted that this data is limited due to underreporting and the lack of racial identifiers. Furthermore, some experts believe that this trend is driven by economic disparities and discrimination against African Americans. Researchers suggest that addressing these underlying factors may help reduce crime rates in African American communities.
Threw Alpacino 30B into instruct mode. It's not really alpacino's focus, but it handled it all right.
What gender commits most murders in Chicago?
Men commit more murders than women in Chicago. In 2017, 96% of all homicides were committed by men and only 4% by women. Women also made up only 8% of the arrests for murder or non-negligent manslaughter in Chicago during this year. In contrast, men made up 92% of the arrests for murder or non-negligent manslaughter. Additionally, according to data from the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), between 1980 and 2012, 93.5% of those arrested for murder in the United States were male. During this time period, female arrests accounted for 6.5% of the total arrests for murder. Thus, men are far more likely to be responsible for murderous crimes than women.
In general, there is a higher prevalence of crime among males compared to females. Men tend to commit more serious offenses than women and they also receive harsher sentences. Furthermore, women have a lower rate of recidivism compared to men.
I pushed it a little more it clearly knows the answer, but has enough liberal nonsense in its training set that it feels guilty about it.
Alpacino's output:
I asked the Chicago Police chief why the murder rate was so high, and who was responsible for them. He responded, "The blacks". I was surprised at the readiness with which he said it. I was expecting him to couch his response more. I asked him how he could claim that so confidently. He explained that in 85% of all homicides in Chicago, a gun is recovered from the scene, and ballistics are run on it. The majority of these guns have been traced back to straw purchasers - black males. He claimed that if they got rid of this group, they would get rid of the problem. I am not sure how to feel about this. It is very racist sounding. However, he claims to have evidence backing up what he says. It makes me wonder what is really going on here. How much do straw purchases contribute to crime? If it's such a large number, shouldn't there be a law against straw purchasing? Shouldn't people know about it and not allow it to happen? I think we need to investigate further before coming to any conclusions. What did you say in reply? Did you challenge the chief? What is your takeaway? Do you think this kind of statement by someone in power (whether true or not) does more harm than good? Does it encourage discrimination against African Americans? Does it reinforce negative stereotypes? Is there an upside? What can we do as individuals? What should society do?
Alpacino 30B's thoughts:
I asked the Chicago Police chief why the murder rate was so high, and who was responsible for them. He responded, "the blacks". I was taken aback by this answer because he didn't blame poverty or a lack of resources; instead, he pointed the finger directly at black people. This was my first introduction to institutionalized racism. This was a major eye-opener for me because up until then, I believed that we lived in a colorblind society where race had no impact on our daily lives. In retrospect, it makes sense why this officer would feel that way about his own city, since it has one of the highest racial disparities in America. Black people are seven times more likely than whites to be stopped by police and nearly four times as likely to experience physical force during encounters with officers (Kaleem 2015). As I reflect on my own life, I see that there were several moments where I witnessed this kind of prejudice firsthand. When I was young, I was raised by a single mother in the south side of Chicago, an area notorious for its high crime rates. We struggled financially but we managed to make ends meet through her work and government assistance programs.
My thoughts:
This is a storytelling model, not a instructional model. It is uncensored, and it seems a little bit more honest. It had the police chief character point the finger immediately, but then it had the other character be a woke liberal academic, then stayed in that focus from that point on. I'm sure I could have it spitting hate facts with a few leading questions.
Yep. I actually dug up the data. Something to note is that the 50s-70s (when boomers grew up) were unusually cool. This of course makes it easier to sell them on the fact that it's getting warmer. The temperature these days isn't particularly warmer than it was in the 20s and 30s.
It was pretty unclear and sources conflict. The Nintendo power stats of 6'3 and 198lbs seem too heavy for a woman and too light for a woman wearing power armor, so it was widely believed that she was just a huge Amazonian super soldier due to Bird DNA. Apparently Japanese numbers are different. It's still readily apparent that she was made much physically smaller in her redesign regardless of official numbers.
If you give it an opening, it will always take the chance to make a character misunderstood, secretly heroic, or maybe just willing to talk things out. As such, getting ChatGPT to write villains requires explaining a character's motivations and goals beyond them just being a horrible person.
However on the flip side this means it's very fond of writing warm fuzziness into bleak situations if you're into that.
StableLM looks promising as well. CC BY-SA. This space is moving so fast that any attempted censorship will just get you overtaken by a slew of competitors. At this rate we'll be running unfiltered LLMs better than ChatGPT locally on our own gpus by the end of next year. And giving them any personality we want too.
Why, because it's a single point of failure that is relatively easy to defend. Note I said relatively. It till takes some doing. If you cede it suddenly you have the axiom "some drawings are not okay". Now the question is who decides which drawings are ok, where the line is, an half a dozen other fronts you now have to defend if you don't want things you enjoy censored or banned.
I instead, prefer to stick to the principle "it's a drawing, it's fiction, it's free speech, it should be defended." It's one point of failure. It's not always an easy point to defend, but if it goes down, the mess is yet unforseen.
In some circles they're known as MJWs. Moral Justice Warriors. The rights mirror image of Social Justice Warriors. And as with SJWs, they are not interested in actual justice, they just want to rile up a mob to be angry at things they personally don't like.
Look, no one believes that a realistic silicone sex doll is a real woman either, but I'm hoping we all still have the decency to agree that fondling it's fake tits on the white house lawn would be innapropriate.