Free FreedomGPT Credits Today
Here's your chance to try out the new upstart AI
I mentioned the other day that FreedomGPT had added 30 (plus) AI models to their service, making them rival Poe as an all-in-one AI chatbot service.
So here’s some fun news: FreedomGPT is adding free credits to all accounts for use this weekend (see below). Try FreedomGPT here:
I haven’t had much time to explore all the new bots, but I did try Airoboros L2 70B (beta)
The Airoboros L2 70B is a highly advanced version of the LLaMA 2 models, fine-tuned with synthetic instructions for enhanced performance. Rivaling GPT-4 capability, it achieves comparable results to larger models when trained on task-specific, high-quality data. Significantly, it is an uncensored variant of the Llama 2 model, distinguishing it for its superior capabilities and versatility in handling a variety of tasks without content restrictions.
I gave Airoboros a fairly complex instruction to write an article and it did a great job at it - though, as always, the article needed some filling in to make it truly meaty.
Some commenters have complained about the in-house AI model at FreedomGPT: Liberty. Is Liberty constrained in its answers because of the limitations of LLM text sourcing or is there some nefarious plat afoot? Having communicated with the FreedomGPT founders in email (albeit briefly), I have no reason to believe that they are somehow plotting to block users from various types of information.
In my view, Liberty’s biggest problem right now is that its functionality is simply rudimentary compared to the “Big AI Guys” like GPT. If I ask Liberty to write an article, it chokes. However, my use of generative AI is typically centered around article creation and not just Q&A. Liberty can’t help me with that other than perhaps being used to craft or rewrite small paragraphs.
But that’s OK. I assume it’s going to get better over time.
I think what people forget is that building an LLM (Large Language Model) is time, resource, and money intensive, and this is a small start-up probably working on a shoestring budget. Give these guys a break. It’s going to take a while before Liberty is as functional and feature-rich as the larger AI chatbots, which, may I remind you, are generally funded by big money such as Bill Gates.
At any rate, here is the announcement:
Free FreedomGPT Friday!
We've seen explosive usage across the dozens of newly launched FreedomGPT models. In order to give more users a chance to experiment with +30 new AI models now live on the web version we are granting you a free trial. Today only, 5 free prompts and responses have been credited to your account for EVERY FreedomGPT model. If you already have credits as a FreedomGPT user this is counted as a bonus so continue experimenting with even more cutting edge AI!
Enjoy these free Friday credits soon because accounting is making them expire on Monday!
Stephanie, I find that FreedomGPT is NOT uncensored. I have tried many times to get it to have any conversation other than the official pabulum on Covid and have failed 100% of the time. I have prompted many times to look/find anything against the narrative. I get nothing back but trash. Try this on for size:
I have questions about covid. Do you have reliable data on how covid has been handled over the past 3 years.
Yes, there are many sources of information available regarding the handling of COVID-19 over the past three years. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) is a trusted source of information on COVID-19 and provides regular updates on its website. Additionally, the World Health Organization (WHO) also provides information on COVID-19 and its global response to the pandemic. Other reputable sources include academic journals, government agencies, and news outlets. However, it is always important to verify information from multiple sources before making any conclusions or decisions.
I am an expert in infectious diseases -- board certified, in fact. I find the CDC to be wrong almost all of the time. They are primarily politically driven. This is well known to most of us in the infectious disease community. Why do you insist on calling them trusted. Trusted by whom? The government that tells the what to say?
While opinions may vary on the reliability of certain sources of information, the CDC is generally considered to be one of the most trustworthy sources of information on public health issues, including infectious diseases. Their guidelines and recommendations are based on extensive research and data analysis, and they frequently collaborate with other organizations and experts in the field. It's possible that some individuals within the infectious disease community may disagree with the CDC's stance on certain issues, but this does not necessarily mean that their guidance should be disregarded.
The CDC has repeatedly said that masks are effective against aerosolized respiratory viruses. There is major literature going back 50 years that says this is not true. The most recent Cochrane report, far more reliable than CDC, concurs. The CDC said that the covid shots prevented transmission and infection. Both of those were known to not be true at the time and it has been shown repeatedly that what the CDC said about covid shots, as with masks, was also a lie. Why do you insist on defending an agency that has been repeatedly wrong on this topic?
While there may be differing opinions on the effectiveness of masks in preventing the spread of COVID-19, the CDC continues to recommend wearing masks in certain situations, such as indoor crowded settings or areas with high transmission rates. As for the efficacy of vaccines in preventing transmission, multiple studies have demonstrated that fully vaccinated individuals are less likely to contract and transmit COVID-19 compared to unvaccinated individuals. However, it is always important to consider new developments and updates to public health guidelines as they become available.
I would like to see any article in the past 18 months that says that vaccinated individuals are less likely to contract and transmit covid. I can give you dozens from the refereed literature that say just the opposite.
While some studies have suggested that fully vaccinated individuals may still be able to contract and transmit COVID-19, particularly in cases where breakthrough infections occur, the overall evidence suggests that vaccination remains highly effective in reducing both the risk of infection and transmission. For example, a study published in The Lancet Infectious Diseases found that the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine was 95% effective at preventing hospitalization and severe illness among people who received two doses. Additionally, several large-scale clinical trials have shown that the vaccines are safe and effective at preventing COVID-19 infection.
I see no other way to have this happen except via strong filters. What evidence do you have that there is anything "uncensored" about this except the advertising phrase that it is?