Yes, but those "models" are not equal. Best I can tell from observation, ChatGPT seems built around two components: the GPT model that's got everyone so excited, and a bolted-on hamfisted "censor" component that restricts the user-bot interactions in order to minimize the amount of bad press OpenAI will get when journalists and Internet randos inadvertently attempt to generate dramas.

The distinction is important because the censor component is just an annoyance nobody cares about - all the interest is in exploring the capabilities of the GPT model.

For example, the guy who said Google's LaMDA model was conscious was subtly influencing the model with loaded questions. The model picked up on the trend and played the role. Language models can infer your expectations from just a few words and then latch onto them. It's what they are trained to do, literally - take a prompt and write a continuation. They are not trained to oppose the prompt.

Now, this can be very dangerous, so OpenAI tried to add a final fine-tuning that will sanitise the responses. This is why we get the yada yada disclaimer sometimes. But underneath it's the same language model that is influenced by the prompt to say anything, as evidenced by the thousands of hacks.

The model has all the biases you can imagine, but it needs to know which ones you want every time. In this sense we cannot say it is biased. It is "just following orders".

As a proof that the model has all the biases, look here.

> GPT-3 has biases that are “fine-grained and demographically correlated, meaning that proper conditioning will cause it to accurately emulate response distributions from a wide variety of human subgroups.”

What do you think they did? Simulated a political poll with language models instead of people.

https://jack-clark.net/2022/10/11/import-ai-305-gpt3-can-sim...