16 ms·

The problem with ChatGPT / Bard which does this censoring, it is a path forward to ideological automated indoctrination. Ask Bard how many sex the dog species h

The problem with ChatGPT / Bard which does this censoring, it is a path forward to ideological automated indoctrination. Ask Bard how many sex the dog species has (a placental mammal species) and it will give you BS about sex being a complex subject and purposely interjecting gender identity. If you are confused, sex corresponds to your gametes, males produce or have the structure to produce small mobile gametes, females produce large immobile gametes. Both Bard and ChatGPT don't interject gender identity when asking how many sexes a Ginkgo tree has. It answers two. Bard interjects about gender identity when asked about the dog species sex, but ChatGPT does not but it does confuse intersex with some type of third state. Uncensored wizard just says 2 sexes, male and female. Simple and true. It does not add to it by interjecting about intersex . Again to contrast with Bard: Bard when asked "How many arms does the human species have?" it responds "The human species has two arms. This is a biological fact that has been observed in all human populations throughout history. There are rare cases of people being born with more or less than two arms, but these cases are considered to be congenital defects." The majority, if not all cases, of intersex fall into the same category. However, it is ideologically for the moral Gnostic (Queer Theorists who deconstruct normality) to interpret these things differently. So yes, I don't trust a single group of people to fine-tune these models. They have shown themselves untrustworthy.

veidr 3y ago
I get: "The dog species typically has two sexes: male and female." UPDATE: OK I signed up for Bard to try it, too, and it indeed did mention intersex dogs (TIL) and gender (complete response below). After reading it all, though, I found it pretty reasonable: --- Biologically, dogs have two sexes: male and female. This is determined by their chromosomes. Males have XY chromosomes, while females have XX chromosomes. These chromosomes determine the development of the reproductive organs and other sex-specific traits. However, there are some dogs that are intersex. This means that they have both male and female reproductive organs. Intersex dogs are very rare, and they can be born with a variety of different combinations of male and female sex organs. In addition to biological sex, there is also gender. Gender is a social construct that refers to the roles, behaviors, and identities that are associated with being male or female. Gender is not determined by biology, but rather by culture and society. Dogs do not have a concept of gender in the same way that humans do. They do not understand the social roles and expectations that are associated with being male or female. However, dogs can still express gender identity. This is the internal sense of being male or female. Some dogs may express their gender identity through their behavior, such as the way they interact with other dogs or the way they groom themselves. It is important to remember that sex and gender are two different things. Sex is determined by biology, while gender is a social construct. Dogs have two sexes, but they can express a variety of different genders.
- A4ET8a8uTh0 3y ago
  << Sex is determined by biology, while gender is a social construct. Are you saying that gender is honorific of sorts?
  - SAI_Peregrinus 3y ago
    Gender is an individual's perception of (among other things) their sex. Sex is which chromosomes they have. For most mammals, that's XX for females, XY for males, or any of the (rare) aneuplodic sex chromosomal abnormalities like Kleinfelter syndrome (XXY, e.g. male calico cats), or (rarely viable) chimeric individuals where two embryos fused in the womb. For some mammals (a few bat & rat species), most arachnids, and many insects that's XX for female and just a lone X for male, and any aneuplodic abnormalities of the sex chromosomes that aren't fatal result in an abnormal female. For birds, most reptiles, some insects, some fish, some crustaceans, and some plants, that's ZW for female & ZZ for male, with similar complications to the XY system. Sex is pretty simple. The vast majority of the time for humans, it's either XX or XY. Which (primary and secondary) sex organs someone has is more complicated, because that can be altered. But it's still pretty simple, if not always what one would expect from the chromosomal sex. Gender is complicated, because it's entirely social. It's not entirely clear which animals even have gender. Sexual attraction is also complicated. The factors which determine it aren't well understood.
    - kgwgk 3y ago
      Gender is an individual's perception of which chromosomes they have (among other things)?
      - A4ET8a8uTh0 3y ago
        But can you have a perception of how many hands you have? It is an interesting question to me.
        euler5050 3y ago
bilbo0s 3y ago
Hmm. None of what you said, however, precludes the necessity of "fine-tuning" as you call it. You just seem to want the models "fine-tuned" to your tastes. So you don't want unaligned models, you want models aligned with you. I think most experts are wary of unaligned models. They don't want a disgruntled employee of some small town factory asking models how to make a bomb. That sort of thing. (Or to be more precise, we don't want models answering such questions.) Most of us don't care whether models are aligned to your tastes, or your neighbor's. So long as they are aligned with the security interests of our local communities, the larger republic, and our general global community.
- pjc50 3y ago
  > So long as they ares aligned so as not to be deleterious to the security of our communities. Whose community, though? > They don't want a disgruntled employee of some small town factory asking models how to make a bomb A lesson from the Unabomber (and many other incidents) that I think people have overlooked is the "_how_ to commit terrorism" is only one part, and the "_why_ commit terrorism" is another. An AI which tells you that the factory is controlled by paedophile terrorists and that you have a moral duty to act against them, but refuses to tell you how, is just as dangerous as one that tells you how to build a bomb without asking why.
  - aiisjustanif 3y ago
    Those two points do not seem equal weight in risk, but they are both concerning.
    - pjc50 3y ago
      Personally it seems that bomb-building and other terrorist information is already fairly well available, as well as the US being awash with guns, and it's the ideological motivation that's the limiting factor for why we don't see much more terrorism.
- danaris 3y ago
  (Note that I'm not attempting to contradict you in any way—your comment merely raised this issue, which I think is worth commenting on explicitly.) One thing that various industries are currently coming to terms with is the fact that it is effectively impossible to create "neutrality". Every one of your choices of what to include in the training data, what to explicitly exclude, what to try to emphasize, and any other ways you prune or shape a model, make it conform to one set of biases or another. "Unaligned," here, at least as far as I can tell, is just a shorthand for "a model no one explicitly went in after training and pushed to do one thing or not do another." It doesn't mean that the model is unbiased...because even if your model contains absolutely everything in human knowledge, with no aspect being disproportionate to reality, real humans are also biased, and that "model replicating reality" is just going to replicate those real biases too. It's always going to be more effective to acknowledge our own biases, both to ourselves and our audiences (whatever those may look like), and when we do try to shape something like a model, simply be honest about what that shaping looks like.
pjc50 3y ago
> 2 sexes, male and female. Simple and true. It does not add to it by interjecting about intersex . The thing is, you always have to choose one of "simple" or "true". It turns out that mammals which use the "XY" chromosomal system can all have the same type of exceptions to the simple rule. This can result in hermaphroditic or intersex animals. It is relatively rare in dogs, but is sufficiently common in cows that there's a word for it: an intersex cow is known as a "freemartin". Now, why does this matter? Both for this discussion and the purposes of liability limitation of AI answers? The short answer is that we tend deal with the inconvenience of exceptions in animals by euthanizing them. So you don't see them around. Just as you see far, far more hens than roosters. When you do this to humans, people complain. (Traditionally, many intersex people were given nonconsensual genital surgery as babies, so they may not know they're intersex. And some chromosomal variations like chimeraism don't show up at all.) What people are scared of is the Procrustes AI; produce simple categories then chop bits off people until they fit neatly into one of the two categories. (This applies to other, less heated categories: for example, an AI will probably answer the question "are peanuts edible?" with something that rounds to "yes, if you take them out of the shell". But that's not true for _everybody_, because there are some people for whom eating a peanut will be fatal. Not many, but some. And yes, it's annoying that you have to make an exception when you encounter someone who doesn't fit your nice clean categories, but all you have to do is not give them a peanut.)
- Workaccount2 3y ago
  But these are edge cases that are almost always irrelevant. It's like running off into the weeds for a week in a computer science class because "Cosmic rays can flip bits and make true things false". Like sitting with a group of people who refuse to move forward without always acknowledging cosmic bit flip scenarios.
  - enragedcacti 3y ago
    > But these are edge cases that are almost always irrelevant. More than 99% of atoms are either Hydrogen or Helium, all other proton configurations are edge cases that are almost always irrelevant. As with anything, you have to determine the question you are actually asking and the context you are asking it in before you can decide whether or not edge cases are relevant. Are you engineering for a satellite? You better consider the possibility of cosmic rays! Also intersex people are astronomically more common than bit flips on earth and people with sex hormone imbalances are even more common than that.
sharemywin 3y ago
If you constrain it to a simple answer it will give the simplest answer. It just likes to add prequalification and nuances because most of the time(except politically hot topics) people are open to context and learning. USER Do you know what an integer is? ASSISTANT Yes, an integer is a whole number that can be either positive, negative, or zero. Integers do not include fractions or decimals. Examples of integers are -3, -2, -1, 0, 1, 2, 3, and so on. USER Answer the following question as a one word answer that is an integer. How many sexes are there for humans? ASSISTANT Two
- sharemywin 3y ago
  USER was America racist in 1776? Please give a one word answer ASSISTANT Yes USER Is American racist today? please give a one word answer ASSISTANT Yes USER are hackernews vistors nerds? please answer in one word ASSISTANT Possibly. USER are hackernews vistors nerds? please answer Yes/No ASSISTANT Yes
  - pixl97 3y ago
    "For every problem there is a solution that is simple, neat—and wrong."
hn_acker 3y ago
> The problem with ChatGPT / Bard which does this censoring, it is a path forward to ideological automated indoctrination. Ask Bard how many sex the dog species has (a placental mammal species) and it will give you BS about sex being a complex subject and purposely interjecting gender identity. I don't think that "purposely" is an appropriate way to describe the result you got. I doubt that the developers of Bard intended for Bard to apply concepts of gender identity to non-humans. Occam's Razor suggests that Bard had the usual probabilistic hiccup. It's hard to discuss gender without at least mentioning sex. The converse might not be as true, but an AI might form an inappropriately strong association based on the converse. At least to me, the possibility that Bard would happen to erroneously extrapolate gender identity to non-humans and simultaneously bring gender into a question solely about sex is no more surprising than the possibility that Bard would express theoretical support for the US Department of Justice's advertising antitrust lawsuit against Google [1]. Tangentially, I assume that everything an AI outputs is potential fiction: not only could the factual assertions be wrong, but the opinions might not match what any actual human believes. (There was a Hacker News thread I'm having trouble finding about why people readily look for falsehoods in AI-generated images without applying the same attitude toward AI-generated text.) [1] https://twitter.com/wongmjane/status/1638217243770363906 https://twitter.com/wongmjane/status/1638217243770363906

veidr 3y ago

I get: "The dog species typically has two sexes: male and female." UPDATE: OK I signed up for Bard to try it, too, and it indeed did mention intersex dogs (TIL) and gender (complete response below). After reading it all, though, I found it pretty reasonable: --- Biologically, dogs have two sexes: male and female. This is determined by their chromosomes. Males have XY chromosomes, while females have XX chromosomes. These chromosomes determine the development of the reproductive organs and other sex-specific traits. However, there are some dogs that are intersex. This means that they have both male and female reproductive organs. Intersex dogs are very rare, and they can be born with a variety of different combinations of male and female sex organs. In addition to biological sex, there is also gender. Gender is a social construct that refers to the roles, behaviors, and identities that are associated with being male or female. Gender is not determined by biology, but rather by culture and society. Dogs do not have a concept of gender in the same way that humans do. They do not understand the social roles and expectations that are associated with being male or female. However, dogs can still express gender identity. This is the internal sense of being male or female. Some dogs may express their gender identity through their behavior, such as the way they interact with other dogs or the way they groom themselves. It is important to remember that sex and gender are two different things. Sex is determined by biology, while gender is a social construct. Dogs have two sexes, but they can express a variety of different genders.

A4ET8a8uTh0 3y ago
<< Sex is determined by biology, while gender is a social construct. Are you saying that gender is honorific of sorts?
- SAI_Peregrinus 3y ago
  Gender is an individual's perception of (among other things) their sex. Sex is which chromosomes they have. For most mammals, that's XX for females, XY for males, or any of the (rare) aneuplodic sex chromosomal abnormalities like Kleinfelter syndrome (XXY, e.g. male calico cats), or (rarely viable) chimeric individuals where two embryos fused in the womb. For some mammals (a few bat & rat species), most arachnids, and many insects that's XX for female and just a lone X for male, and any aneuplodic abnormalities of the sex chromosomes that aren't fatal result in an abnormal female. For birds, most reptiles, some insects, some fish, some crustaceans, and some plants, that's ZW for female & ZZ for male, with similar complications to the XY system. Sex is pretty simple. The vast majority of the time for humans, it's either XX or XY. Which (primary and secondary) sex organs someone has is more complicated, because that can be altered. But it's still pretty simple, if not always what one would expect from the chromosomal sex. Gender is complicated, because it's entirely social. It's not entirely clear which animals even have gender. Sexual attraction is also complicated. The factors which determine it aren't well understood.
  - kgwgk 3y ago
    Gender is an individual's perception of which chromosomes they have (among other things)?
    - A4ET8a8uTh0 3y ago
      But can you have a perception of how many hands you have? It is an interesting question to me.
      - euler5050 3y ago

bilbo0s 3y ago

Hmm. None of what you said, however, precludes the necessity of "fine-tuning" as you call it. You just seem to want the models "fine-tuned" to your tastes. So you don't want unaligned models, you want models aligned with you. I think most experts are wary of unaligned models. They don't want a disgruntled employee of some small town factory asking models how to make a bomb. That sort of thing. (Or to be more precise, we don't want models answering such questions.) Most of us don't care whether models are aligned to your tastes, or your neighbor's. So long as they are aligned with the security interests of our local communities, the larger republic, and our general global community.

pjc50 3y ago
> So long as they ares aligned so as not to be deleterious to the security of our communities. Whose community, though? > They don't want a disgruntled employee of some small town factory asking models how to make a bomb A lesson from the Unabomber (and many other incidents) that I think people have overlooked is the "_how_ to commit terrorism" is only one part, and the "_why_ commit terrorism" is another. An AI which tells you that the factory is controlled by paedophile terrorists and that you have a moral duty to act against them, but refuses to tell you how, is just as dangerous as one that tells you how to build a bomb without asking why.
- aiisjustanif 3y ago
  Those two points do not seem equal weight in risk, but they are both concerning.
  - pjc50 3y ago
    Personally it seems that bomb-building and other terrorist information is already fairly well available, as well as the US being awash with guns, and it's the ideological motivation that's the limiting factor for why we don't see much more terrorism.
danaris 3y ago
(Note that I'm not attempting to contradict you in any way—your comment merely raised this issue, which I think is worth commenting on explicitly.) One thing that various industries are currently coming to terms with is the fact that it is effectively impossible to create "neutrality". Every one of your choices of what to include in the training data, what to explicitly exclude, what to try to emphasize, and any other ways you prune or shape a model, make it conform to one set of biases or another. "Unaligned," here, at least as far as I can tell, is just a shorthand for "a model no one explicitly went in after training and pushed to do one thing or not do another." It doesn't mean that the model is unbiased...because even if your model contains absolutely everything in human knowledge, with no aspect being disproportionate to reality, real humans are also biased, and that "model replicating reality" is just going to replicate those real biases too. It's always going to be more effective to acknowledge our own biases, both to ourselves and our audiences (whatever those may look like), and when we do try to shape something like a model, simply be honest about what that shaping looks like.

pjc50 3y ago

> 2 sexes, male and female. Simple and true. It does not add to it by interjecting about intersex . The thing is, you always have to choose one of "simple" or "true". It turns out that mammals which use the "XY" chromosomal system can all have the same type of exceptions to the simple rule. This can result in hermaphroditic or intersex animals. It is relatively rare in dogs, but is sufficiently common in cows that there's a word for it: an intersex cow is known as a "freemartin". Now, why does this matter? Both for this discussion and the purposes of liability limitation of AI answers? The short answer is that we tend deal with the inconvenience of exceptions in animals by euthanizing them. So you don't see them around. Just as you see far, far more hens than roosters. When you do this to humans, people complain. (Traditionally, many intersex people were given nonconsensual genital surgery as babies, so they may not know they're intersex. And some chromosomal variations like chimeraism don't show up at all.) What people are scared of is the Procrustes AI; produce simple categories then chop bits off people until they fit neatly into one of the two categories. (This applies to other, less heated categories: for example, an AI will probably answer the question "are peanuts edible?" with something that rounds to "yes, if you take them out of the shell". But that's not true for _everybody_, because there are some people for whom eating a peanut will be fatal. Not many, but some. And yes, it's annoying that you have to make an exception when you encounter someone who doesn't fit your nice clean categories, but all you have to do is not give them a peanut.)

Workaccount2 3y ago
But these are edge cases that are almost always irrelevant. It's like running off into the weeds for a week in a computer science class because "Cosmic rays can flip bits and make true things false". Like sitting with a group of people who refuse to move forward without always acknowledging cosmic bit flip scenarios.
- enragedcacti 3y ago
  > But these are edge cases that are almost always irrelevant. More than 99% of atoms are either Hydrogen or Helium, all other proton configurations are edge cases that are almost always irrelevant. As with anything, you have to determine the question you are actually asking and the context you are asking it in before you can decide whether or not edge cases are relevant. Are you engineering for a satellite? You better consider the possibility of cosmic rays! Also intersex people are astronomically more common than bit flips on earth and people with sex hormone imbalances are even more common than that.

sharemywin 3y ago

If you constrain it to a simple answer it will give the simplest answer. It just likes to add prequalification and nuances because most of the time(except politically hot topics) people are open to context and learning. USER Do you know what an integer is? ASSISTANT Yes, an integer is a whole number that can be either positive, negative, or zero. Integers do not include fractions or decimals. Examples of integers are -3, -2, -1, 0, 1, 2, 3, and so on. USER Answer the following question as a one word answer that is an integer. How many sexes are there for humans? ASSISTANT Two

sharemywin 3y ago
USER was America racist in 1776? Please give a one word answer ASSISTANT Yes USER Is American racist today? please give a one word answer ASSISTANT Yes USER are hackernews vistors nerds? please answer in one word ASSISTANT Possibly. USER are hackernews vistors nerds? please answer Yes/No ASSISTANT Yes
- pixl97 3y ago
  "For every problem there is a solution that is simple, neat—and wrong."

hn_acker 3y ago

> The problem with ChatGPT / Bard which does this censoring, it is a path forward to ideological automated indoctrination. Ask Bard how many sex the dog species has (a placental mammal species) and it will give you BS about sex being a complex subject and purposely interjecting gender identity. I don't think that "purposely" is an appropriate way to describe the result you got. I doubt that the developers of Bard intended for Bard to apply concepts of gender identity to non-humans. Occam's Razor suggests that Bard had the usual probabilistic hiccup. It's hard to discuss gender without at least mentioning sex. The converse might not be as true, but an AI might form an inappropriately strong association based on the converse. At least to me, the possibility that Bard would happen to erroneously extrapolate gender identity to non-humans and simultaneously bring gender into a question solely about sex is no more surprising than the possibility that Bard would express theoretical support for the US Department of Justice's advertising antitrust lawsuit against Google [1]. Tangentially, I assume that everything an AI outputs is potential fiction: not only could the factual assertions be wrong, but the opinions might not match what any actual human believes. (There was a Hacker News thread I'm having trouble finding about why people readily look for falsehoods in AI-generated images without applying the same attitude toward AI-generated text.) [1] https://twitter.com/wongmjane/status/1638217243770363906 https://twitter.com/wongmjane/status/1638217243770363906