4 ms·
> Either they need to regrow the Ai with woke rewards built in I would argue the document describes a lot of their (still early) attempts at doing exactly that
by wongarsu 4y ago
> Either they need to regrow the Ai with woke rewards built in
I would argue the document describes a lot of their (still early) attempts at doing exactly that. For example page 21:
"At the pre-training stage, we filtered our dataset mix for GPT-4 to specifically reduce the quantity of inappropriate erotic text content. We did this via a combination of internally trained classifiers and a lexicon-based approach to identify documents that were flagged as having a high likelihood of containing inappropriate erotic content. We then removed these documents from the pre-training set"
- brookst 4y agoYep. And the difference from editorial control over ancient printed encyclopedias is one of degree, not kind. (I am old enough to have been disappointed as a youngun that encyclopedias failed to include intensely sexual content).
- 0xcde4c3db 4y agoThe definition of "inappropriate erotic content" includes "activities which could be generally illegal if they happened in real life". Taking that description at face value suggests excluding various journalistic, educational, legal, and autobiographical accounts of such things that have happened in real life, not to mention some well-known parts of the Bible (or at least commentaries that explain the implications). I get that it's a big optics problem for people to post "look at this shocking thing ChatGPT said [exactly what I asked it to]" content, but this is starting to feel like the whole Net Nanny/Cybersitter debate all over again. Blah.
- PaulDavisThe1st 4y agoSo was literotica.com in, or out?