4 ms·

I don't think the particular issue is with deciding what hate is. Your example said that the AI would understand all of those as hate, and I think it wo

by marrs 9y ago

I don't think the particular issue is with deciding what hate is. Your example said that the AI would understand all of those as hate, and I think it would be correct. What makes you so sure about that? What if the context is "I hate scientists...they keep proving me wrong". Is that a show of hatred or a tongue-in-cheek show of respect? And then there's all the stuff that people say that gets misunderstood by other people. And then there's all the gaming that's going to take place, where people realise they can silence their opponents by describing their opinions as being "hateful". Oh wait, that's happening already.

etplayer 9y ago
> What makes you so sure about that? What if the context is "I hate scientists...they keep proving me wrong". Is that a show of hatred or a tongue-in-cheek show of respect? You are correct, I didn't consider this, so there at least two problems with deciding what is hateful: (1) is the expression insincere?, (2) if it is sincere, is the hate justified? This is of course assuming such a machine can be designed to obtain the correct meaning of words in every case, which I think is impossible or close to it. Language is ambiguous, some languages more than others.
- Govindae 9y ago
  This is a general NLP problem. People use language in more complicated ways than direct literal encoding. In the general case, it's a very hard problem, but hate specifically may not be so difficult. People tend not to use phrases like "kill all the" in unambiguous ways.
  - belovedeagle 9y ago
    However, a significant (not large, significant) proportion of Americans believe that the phrase "kill all the Nazis" is not hate because <reasons>, or at least is "justified hate", whatever that means.
    - etplayer 9y ago
      Although it's clearly hate, it is regarded as justified for reasons which some people agree with; a good read on this, from which I got the idea about the "subversive element" of society is Marcuse's essay Repressive Tolerance (1965), which you can find here: http://www.marcuse.org/herbert/pubs/60spubs/65repressivetolerance.htm http://www.marcuse.org/herbert/pubs/60spubs/65repressivetole...

by marrs 9y ago

etplayer 9y ago

> What makes you so sure about that? What if the context is "I hate scientists...they keep proving me wrong". Is that a show of hatred or a tongue-in-cheek show of respect? You are correct, I didn't consider this, so there at least two problems with deciding what is hateful: (1) is the expression insincere?, (2) if it is sincere, is the hate justified? This is of course assuming such a machine can be designed to obtain the correct meaning of words in every case, which I think is impossible or close to it. Language is ambiguous, some languages more than others.

Govindae 9y ago
This is a general NLP problem. People use language in more complicated ways than direct literal encoding. In the general case, it's a very hard problem, but hate specifically may not be so difficult. People tend not to use phrases like "kill all the" in unambiguous ways.
- belovedeagle 9y ago
  However, a significant (not large, significant) proportion of Americans believe that the phrase "kill all the Nazis" is not hate because <reasons>, or at least is "justified hate", whatever that means.
  - etplayer 9y ago
    Although it's clearly hate, it is regarded as justified for reasons which some people agree with; a good read on this, from which I got the idea about the "subversive element" of society is Marcuse's essay Repressive Tolerance (1965), which you can find here: http://www.marcuse.org/herbert/pubs/60spubs/65repressivetolerance.htm http://www.marcuse.org/herbert/pubs/60spubs/65repressivetole...