Ask HN: How does BingGPT delete messages after sending them? Why/how does BingGPT delete message it sends after sending them as seen in multiple videos leaked. Anyone from Microsoft that can comment? I am assuming there is a "higher-level" God AI which is just another LLM that is doing sentiment analysis on the messages output by the "lower-level" ChatGPT bots. It is interesting the decision to screen the message after sending it, maybe this is to avoid a performance hit on the initial answer. |
After Bing has finished generating a message, it will likely call the moderation API with the message it has generated to see if it accidentally generated anything inappropriate. If so, it'll delete the message and replace it with a generic "Sorry, I don't know how to help here." message instead.
EDIT: I tried calling the moderation API with the message in your example and it does get flagged for violence:
"flagged":true,
"categories":{
"sexual":false,
"hate":false,
"violence":true,
"self-harm":false,
"sexual/minors":false,
"hate/threatening":false,
"violence/graphic":false
}As for why they let you see it word by word, honestly it’s for effect. It’s cool to see it “think” real-time, and it functions like a progress bar, vs waiting for a spinning wheel and the full answer to come out. It makes it feel much faster.
It's possible this would work, but it would need experimentation, for sure. It's also possible the AI would read the partial response, realize it's going down a 'bad' path, and then stop itself.
It probably could work like you how you mention, but then you're left with a 5-10 second wait while the AI 'thinks' after you send a message. I suspect someone made a decision to be more responsive than safe.
ChatGPT is the same way, though I've had ChatGPT cut itself off mid-response before. Maybe they might be calling the moderation API after every token is generated instead of once at the end?
Assume you have a robot instructed to protect humans.
How do you verify the action-plan passes moderation (i.e. doesn't harm a human) when the individual actions each do pass moderation, but the plan as a whole is dangerous (will harm a human).
Waiting to verify the entire chain of actions before starting actions in motion means your reaction time is slower.
If the robot is standing at a crosswalk, and sees a girl about to get hit by a car, he has to decide if he will push the girl out of the way, or if that action will cause greater harm.
The individual actions (activate arm, move arm towards girl, orient hand, shove girl out of path of car, etc) might each look beneficial to the human but as a whole actually are harmful.
However, the reaction time for the robot to save the girl might require near-immediate response.
Do you start processing the pipeline immediately or do you wait to verify the entire thing passes moderation?