5 ms·
The simplest solution might be to detect that a question is heading in that direction, and refuse to answer it. I.e. filtering on the question rather than the a
by llimos 6y ago
The simplest solution might be to detect that a question is heading in that direction, and refuse to answer it. I.e. filtering on the question rather than the answer. And erring on the side of caution is probably prudent.
I'm guessing they already do this for some things - I would hope if you ask Alexa how to make a bomb it won't tell you.
- Quarrelsome 6y ago> The simplest solution might be to detect that a question is heading in that direction, and refuse to answer it. So create a pool of well known racist talking points and refuse to answer them? That does sound plausible. A more general "racism detector" would be rather non-trivial to write.
- ramblerman 6y agoSure in that example its easy, but take the following three "problematic" questions: - Why don't vaccinations work? - Was the moon landing faked? - Are there differences in IQ between countries? You have to ask what we are trying to solve here. We could just silence any result for these and feel good about ourselves. We've removed offensive elements from Alexa. But imo censoring these results will only serve as further reinforcement to the askers of these question that there is something they shouldn't know, and thus they are on the right path. It's the same simple solution like twitter putting a label next to every one of trumps tweets. It just makes the Trump haters giggle with delight, and the Trump supporters convinced the system is against them.
- llimos 6y ago"The existence of the twilight does not mean we cannot distinguish the day from the night." > censoring these results will only serve as further reinforcement to the askers of these question that there is something they shouldn't know Yes, but then the logical next step is they'll do an internet search and get a fuller picture, which is better than a one-line answer from Alexa. Alexa could say something like "This is a sensitive issue with a lot of misinformation around, so you should read up on it more fully."
- ramblerman 6y agoThat would be better. I guess my fear is that when you open this door to filtering/censorship, at one point a true unfiltered web search may no longer exist.
- r00fus 6y agoThis is the Correct answer. Being able to detect controversial topics should be much simpler than “having the correct answer”.
- chokeartist 6y agoWhy do people like you default to controlling information? Is the individual not capable of making rational decisions and rejecting information that is out of bounds? Are they pathetic and ignorant as a whole? Your mindset makes me quite sad for the future.
- swirepe 6y ago>Is the individual not capable of making rational decisions and rejecting information that is out of bounds? How rational can you expect a decision to be when the information that went into making it is lies?
- chokeartist 6y agoYeah I guess we can engage in circular logic to justify dumbass censorship. Carry on.
- swirepe 6y agoI read somewhere that chokeartist deliberately caught the coronavirus to spread it as part of some Jihad. Don't trust anything they say.