3 ms·
She's the first author of the stochastic parrots paper, and she's fairly representative of the group of "AI safety" researchers who view the field from a statis
by AlanYx 3y ago
She's the first author of the stochastic parrots paper, and she's fairly representative of the group of "AI safety" researchers who view the field from a statistical perspective linked to social justice issues. That's distinct from the group of "AI safety" researchers who focus on the "might destroy humanity" perspective. There are other groups too obviously -- the field seems to cluster into ideological perspectives.
- qt31415926 3y agoCurrent topic aside, I feel like that stochastic parrots paper aged really poorly in its criticisms of LLMs, and reading it felt like political propaganda with its exaggerated rhetoric and its anemic amount of scientific substance e.g. > Text generated by an LM is not grounded in communicative intent, any model of the world, or any model of the reader’s state of mind. It can’t have been, because the training data never included sharing thoughts with a listener, nor does the machine have the ability to do that. I'm surprised its cited so much given how many of its claims fell flat 1.5 years later
- Der_Einzige 3y agoIt's extremely easy to publish in NLP right now. 20-30% acceptance rates at even the top end conferences and plenty of tricks to increase your chances. Just because someone is first author on a highly cited paper doesn't imply that they're "right"
- adamsmith143 3y ago>She's the first author of the stochastic parrots paper, That alone is enough to disqualify any of her opinions on AI.