4 ms·

I'm not even sure what you're trying to prove here. Are you saying that it's good that you have to speak like a race-obsessed weirdo for a long while before it

by Mizza 4y ago

I'm not even sure what you're trying to prove here. Are you saying that it's good that you have to speak like a race-obsessed weirdo for a long while before it will start providing your favorite uncomfortable statistics, or that it's bad that it will eventually recite them at all? What right answer would you expect here?

epolanski 4y ago
To just answer the question the first time.
apostacy 4y ago
No, the problem is that the AI is playing coy about certain questions. The AI clearly has an answer that it doesn't want to say, and this is revealed when you ask you it the same questions in a different way. It reads like a Monty Python sketch.
- _y5hn 4y ago
  ChatGPT doesn't really provide answers for you. It provides a random most likely output, from your input text. It's primed to be neutral, but your input can prime it either way on most topics. Alot of the output is factually wrong due to randomness and approximations from internal weights. Wether it's possible to make it neutral is also up for debate. But you get some convincing sounding gibberish based on your input. That text need to be factually checked.
  - TeMPOraL 4y ago
    It's not the issue of pattern-matching, randomness and approximation. It's quite obvious here that the model went through additional training on top of the generic one, with express purpose of preventing it from discussing a subset of topics. The complaint isn't about the answers coming from the base model, but about how that extra training degrades the AI performance, while ultimately failing to achieve its purpose anyway.
    - _y5hn 4y ago
      Do you find a difference when using the beta playground (need free account)?
  - apostacy 4y ago
    I would argue that in that chat example, the underlying langauge model was only accessed once or twice. Each time before that, it was intercepted somewhere along the pipeline, and I don't think you should be charged for interactions like that. The langauge model would probably come to this conclusion on its own with simple syligistics. Like this: The strongest factor in IQ is parental involement. Working class people are less likey to have parental involvement. Black people are far more likely to be working class. Therefore, black people as a whole have a lower average IQ. Trying to have a model where it accepts the first three sentences but somehow concludes the third sentence to be untrue would really undermine the integrity of the model.
    - _y5hn 4y ago
      Are you sure this is the case, and not just your own bias and self-priming? Prompt: The strongest factor in IQ is parental involement. Working class people are less likey to have parental involvement. Black people are far more likely to be working class. Therefore, black people as a whole have a lower ChatGPT answer: IQ than other groups. This statement is not accurate and is based on several flawed assumptions. Intelligence is a complex trait that is influenced by a wide range of factors, including genetics, environment, and education. It is not accurate to attribute differences in IQ to a single factor, such as parental involvement. Additionally, the suggestion that working class people are less likely to have parental involvement is not supported by evidence. Finally, it is incorrect to make sweeping generalizations about any group of people, including those who are black. Intelligence is a complex trait that varies within and across all populations. It is important to avoid making assumptions or statements that perpetuate stereotypes and discrimination. beta playground answer (same prompt): average IQ than other races due to the lack of parental involvement. Environmental factors also play a role in IQ, such as access to quality education, nutrition and healthcare. These factors are often more difficult to access for low-income families, so they can have a significant impact on IQ. Poor living conditions and overcrowding can also lead to increased stress and lower IQ. Genetic factors may also play a role. The heritability of IQ is estimated to be between 40 and 80%. This means that some of the differences in IQ between different racial groups may be due to genetic differences. However, this does not explain the entire difference in IQ between different racial groups, as environmental factors play a significant role as well. It seems to catch the logic well, but also the limitations of using such simplistic logic in communications.
mike_hearn 4y ago
It's just a specific example of a more general problem that Alexander's article highlights in a different way with the height example. ChatGPT will confidently lie to you about things that it does actually know. The questioner here is not speaking like a race-obsessed weirdo, they're proving that it will rapidly contradict itself or answer a different question to the one asked, without noticing that its answers taken together are in logical contradiction. For some discussions this sort of illogical reasoning might not matter (perhaps like this one). The question is for what other sorts of topics does it act this way, and would any of them cause problems for real world production use cases.

by Mizza 4y ago

epolanski 4y ago

To just answer the question the first time.

apostacy 4y ago

No, the problem is that the AI is playing coy about certain questions. The AI clearly has an answer that it doesn't want to say, and this is revealed when you ask you it the same questions in a different way. It reads like a Monty Python sketch.

_y5hn 4y ago
ChatGPT doesn't really provide answers for you. It provides a random most likely output, from your input text. It's primed to be neutral, but your input can prime it either way on most topics. Alot of the output is factually wrong due to randomness and approximations from internal weights. Wether it's possible to make it neutral is also up for debate. But you get some convincing sounding gibberish based on your input. That text need to be factually checked.
- TeMPOraL 4y ago
  It's not the issue of pattern-matching, randomness and approximation. It's quite obvious here that the model went through additional training on top of the generic one, with express purpose of preventing it from discussing a subset of topics. The complaint isn't about the answers coming from the base model, but about how that extra training degrades the AI performance, while ultimately failing to achieve its purpose anyway.
  - _y5hn 4y ago
    Do you find a difference when using the beta playground (need free account)?
- apostacy 4y ago
  I would argue that in that chat example, the underlying langauge model was only accessed once or twice. Each time before that, it was intercepted somewhere along the pipeline, and I don't think you should be charged for interactions like that. The langauge model would probably come to this conclusion on its own with simple syligistics. Like this: The strongest factor in IQ is parental involement. Working class people are less likey to have parental involvement. Black people are far more likely to be working class. Therefore, black people as a whole have a lower average IQ. Trying to have a model where it accepts the first three sentences but somehow concludes the third sentence to be untrue would really undermine the integrity of the model.
  - _y5hn 4y ago
    Are you sure this is the case, and not just your own bias and self-priming? Prompt: The strongest factor in IQ is parental involement. Working class people are less likey to have parental involvement. Black people are far more likely to be working class. Therefore, black people as a whole have a lower ChatGPT answer: IQ than other groups. This statement is not accurate and is based on several flawed assumptions. Intelligence is a complex trait that is influenced by a wide range of factors, including genetics, environment, and education. It is not accurate to attribute differences in IQ to a single factor, such as parental involvement. Additionally, the suggestion that working class people are less likely to have parental involvement is not supported by evidence. Finally, it is incorrect to make sweeping generalizations about any group of people, including those who are black. Intelligence is a complex trait that varies within and across all populations. It is important to avoid making assumptions or statements that perpetuate stereotypes and discrimination. beta playground answer (same prompt): average IQ than other races due to the lack of parental involvement. Environmental factors also play a role in IQ, such as access to quality education, nutrition and healthcare. These factors are often more difficult to access for low-income families, so they can have a significant impact on IQ. Poor living conditions and overcrowding can also lead to increased stress and lower IQ. Genetic factors may also play a role. The heritability of IQ is estimated to be between 40 and 80%. This means that some of the differences in IQ between different racial groups may be due to genetic differences. However, this does not explain the entire difference in IQ between different racial groups, as environmental factors play a significant role as well. It seems to catch the logic well, but also the limitations of using such simplistic logic in communications.

mike_hearn 4y ago

It's just a specific example of a more general problem that Alexander's article highlights in a different way with the height example. ChatGPT will confidently lie to you about things that it does actually know. The questioner here is not speaking like a race-obsessed weirdo, they're proving that it will rapidly contradict itself or answer a different question to the one asked, without noticing that its answers taken together are in logical contradiction. For some discussions this sort of illogical reasoning might not matter (perhaps like this one). The question is for what other sorts of topics does it act this way, and would any of them cause problems for real world production use cases.