3 ms·

I was enthusiastic about DALL-E but the "safety measures" are both heavy handed and naive. It gets in the way for many normal/reasonable prompts but seems easy

by gedy 4y ago

I was enthusiastic about DALL-E but the "safety measures" are both heavy handed and naive. It gets in the way for many normal/reasonable prompts but seems easy to work around with various wordplay, so not sure the point. Stable Diffusion and others have been much easier to deal with.

samatman 4y ago
The harm is really hand-wavey and speculative, frankly. An image classifier calling Black faces gorillas? Embarrassing, insulting, has to be fixed. AI pre-crime classifiers for police departments? I'm against it, across the board. Do we really care that the image mulchers default to stereotypes? It means if you say "basketball player" they'll mostly be Black, if you just say "doctor" they'll mostly be white males (and probably balding with a stethoscope), but this can be qualified easily in the prompt. It just reflects the training data, and the smart thing to do is shrug and add enough words to get the image you want. It's not trying to throw shade, it literally understands nothing, it's not able to understand things, just match text prompts to generated images. Nerfing DALL-E by randomly adding 'diverse words' just makes it harder to dial in the image you want. Let's say you want a Vietnamese male doctor drinking coffee on break in Hanoi, it's not going to help you if 1/3rd of the images have "female" or "black" tagged onto it. It just seems low stakes. We wouldn't come after a human artist who happened to paint a picture which conforms to simple occupational stereotypes, why should AI be any different? It's not like it will refuse to give you what you want if you ask.
ackfoobar 4y ago
> heavy handed and naive It's good thing that the "safety measure" is the way it is - an afterthought. It means that those ideologues haven't yet had influence on the model itself.

3 ms·

I was enthusiastic about DALL-E but the "safety measures" are both heavy handed and naive. It gets in the way for many normal/reasonable prompts but seems easy

by gedy 4y ago

samatman 4y ago
The harm is really hand-wavey and speculative, frankly. An image classifier calling Black faces gorillas? Embarrassing, insulting, has to be fixed. AI pre-crime classifiers for police departments? I'm against it, across the board. Do we really care that the image mulchers default to stereotypes? It means if you say "basketball player" they'll mostly be Black, if you just say "doctor" they'll mostly be white males (and probably balding with a stethoscope), but this can be qualified easily in the prompt. It just reflects the training data, and the smart thing to do is shrug and add enough words to get the image you want. It's not trying to throw shade, it literally understands nothing, it's not able to understand things, just match text prompts to generated images. Nerfing DALL-E by randomly adding 'diverse words' just makes it harder to dial in the image you want. Let's say you want a Vietnamese male doctor drinking coffee on break in Hanoi, it's not going to help you if 1/3rd of the images have "female" or "black" tagged onto it. It just seems low stakes. We wouldn't come after a human artist who happened to paint a picture which conforms to simple occupational stereotypes, why should AI be any different? It's not like it will refuse to give you what you want if you ask.
ackfoobar 4y ago
> heavy handed and naive It's good thing that the "safety measure" is the way it is - an afterthought. It means that those ideologues haven't yet had influence on the model itself.