I’ve implemented a few of these and that’s about the most lazy implementation possible. That system prompt must be 4 words and a crayon drawing. No jailbreak protection, no conversation alignment, no blocking of conversation atypical requests? Amateur hour, but I bet someone got paid.
And that’s just smart design, so you don’t get fried if the breaker or RCD is physically blocked or is wilfully held in place, like with hillbilly Bob over here.
Let’s just hope for Gabe to live a long life still. Valve is a private company and not nearly as much in danger for enshittification as a public company would be.
Eh, that’s not quite true. There is a general alignment tax, meaning aligning the LLM during RLHF lobotomizes it some, but we’re talking about usecase specific bots, e.g. for customer support for specific properties/brands/websites. In those cases, locking them down to specific conversations and topics still gives them a lot of leeway, and their understanding of what the user wants and the ways it can respond are still very good.
Better host it yourself, because the managed version of Ghost has the lovely dark pattern that you cannot cancel your plan without them immediately deleting everything, no matter if your plan is still paid for for another few months or not. Really left a bad taste on my mouth.
Depends on the model/provider. If you’re running this in Azure you can use their content filtering which includes jailbreak and prompt exfiltration protection. Otherwise you can strap some heuristics in front or utilize a smaller specialized model that looks at the incoming prompts.
With stronger models like GPT4 that will adhere to every instruction of the system prompt you can harden it pretty well with instructions alone, GPT3.5 not so much.