Meta is inviting researchers to pick apart the flaws in its version of GPT-3
Really concerning to me that people find the luddite argument so persuasive and that it gets so much play in the press. The crux of the argument from the outside "ethicists" quoted in the article is something like.<p>"This new piece of technology might be dangerous and we don't fully understand it, so we should not poke at it or allow people to study it."<p>Maybe there's just something about my personality that is deeply at odds with this sentiment, but it's also about the lack of testable predictions coming from people like this. Their position could be taken about literally anything with the same logical justification. It's a political and emotional stance masquerading as a technical or scientific process.