5 ms·

Issue appears to be that the uncensored model too closely reflects reality with all its troubling details such as history.

the_third_wave 3y ago
Black vikings do not model reality. Asking for 'an Irish person' produces a Leprechaun. Defending racism when it concerns racism against white people is just as bad as defending it when it concerns any other group.
- GrumpySloth 3y ago
  I think you two are agreeing.
  - manjalyc 3y ago
    They indeed are, just in a very polemic way. What a funny time we live in.
    - mjburgess 3y ago
      Different meaning to 'reality'. ie., social-historical vs. material-historical. Since black vikings are not part of material history, the model is not reflecting reality. Calling social-historical ideas 'reality' is the problem with the parent comment. They arent, and it lets the riggers at google off the hook. Colorising people of history isnt a reality corrective, it's merely anti-social-history, not pro-material-reality
      - manjalyc 3y ago
        I agree with you, and I think you have misunderstood the nuance of the parent comment. He is not letting google "off the hook", but rather being tongue-in-cheek/slightly satirical when he says that the reality is too troubling for google. Which I believe is exactly what you mean when you call it "anti-social-history, not pro-material-reality ".
    - carlosjobim 3y ago
      Maybe I don't understand the culture here on HN, but not every response to a comment has to be a disagreement. Sometimes you're just adding to a point somebody else made.
      - GrumpySloth 3y ago
        In this case though the comment starts with a categorical negation of something that was said in a tongue-in-cheek way in the comment being replied to. It suggests a counterpoint is made. Yet it’s not.
      - seanw444 3y ago
        Yep, it bugs me too. Actually you're wrong because <argument on semantics> when in reality the truth is <minor technicality>.
- sconely 3y ago
  [dead]
- Mountain_Skies 3y ago
  Quite a hefty percentage of the people responsible for the current day's obsession with identity issues openly state racism against white people is impossible. This has been part of their belief system for decades, probably heard on a widescale for the first time during an episode of season one of 'The Real World' in 1992 but favored in academia for much longer than that.
  - PurpleRamen 3y ago
    It's because they have a very different definition of racism. Basically, according to this belief, if you are seen as part of the ethnic group in power, you will not be able to experience noteworthy levels of discrimination because of your genetic makeup.
    - jansan 3y ago
      That sounds like a very racist defintion of racism to me.
      - jl6 3y ago
        Redefining words is what a lot of the last ~10 years of polarization boils down to.
    - tourmalinetaco 3y ago
      Ironically, this is the exact same reasoning Neo-Nazis use for their hatred of the Jewish population. Weird how these parallels between extremist ideologies keep arising.
      - hotdogscout 3y ago
        It's almost like the "socialism" part of "national socialism" was not in fact irrelevant. See: Ba'aathism.
        deleted 3y ago
        [deleted]
bunbun69 3y ago
Source?
fenomas 3y ago
Surely it's more likely that Google is just appending random keywords to incoming prompts, the same way DALLE used to do (or still does)?
- tourmalinetaco 3y ago
  It wouldn’t shock me either way, Google loves to both neuter products into uselessness and fuck with user inputs to skew results for what they deem is best for them.
gniv 3y ago
The troubling details are probably the racist things found on all the forums. Do you want your LLM to reflect that? I suspect Google overcompensated.
eadmund 3y ago
History? George Washington was always Black, Genghis Khan was always white, and Julius Caesar was always an albino Japanese woman. Also, Oceania has always been at war with Eastasia, war is peace and freedom is slavery. From my more substantive comment at https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39471003 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39471003: > The Ministry of Truth in Orwell’s 1984 would have loved this sort of thing. Why go to the work of manually rewriting history when you can just generate a new one on demand? … Generative AI should strive to be actually unbiased. That means it should not skew numbers in either direction, for anyone.
- pram 3y ago
  FWIW the government in 1984 actually had automated content generation, since thats how they produced pornography for the proles.

the_third_wave 3y ago

Black vikings do not model reality. Asking for 'an Irish person' produces a Leprechaun. Defending racism when it concerns racism against white people is just as bad as defending it when it concerns any other group.

GrumpySloth 3y ago
I think you two are agreeing.
- manjalyc 3y ago
  They indeed are, just in a very polemic way. What a funny time we live in.
  - mjburgess 3y ago
    Different meaning to 'reality'. ie., social-historical vs. material-historical. Since black vikings are not part of material history, the model is not reflecting reality. Calling social-historical ideas 'reality' is the problem with the parent comment. They arent, and it lets the riggers at google off the hook. Colorising people of history isnt a reality corrective, it's merely anti-social-history, not pro-material-reality
    - manjalyc 3y ago
      I agree with you, and I think you have misunderstood the nuance of the parent comment. He is not letting google "off the hook", but rather being tongue-in-cheek/slightly satirical when he says that the reality is too troubling for google. Which I believe is exactly what you mean when you call it "anti-social-history, not pro-material-reality ".
  - carlosjobim 3y ago
    Maybe I don't understand the culture here on HN, but not every response to a comment has to be a disagreement. Sometimes you're just adding to a point somebody else made.
    - GrumpySloth 3y ago
      In this case though the comment starts with a categorical negation of something that was said in a tongue-in-cheek way in the comment being replied to. It suggests a counterpoint is made. Yet it’s not.
    - seanw444 3y ago
      Yep, it bugs me too. Actually you're wrong because <argument on semantics> when in reality the truth is <minor technicality>.
sconely 3y ago
[dead]
Mountain_Skies 3y ago
Quite a hefty percentage of the people responsible for the current day's obsession with identity issues openly state racism against white people is impossible. This has been part of their belief system for decades, probably heard on a widescale for the first time during an episode of season one of 'The Real World' in 1992 but favored in academia for much longer than that.
- PurpleRamen 3y ago
  It's because they have a very different definition of racism. Basically, according to this belief, if you are seen as part of the ethnic group in power, you will not be able to experience noteworthy levels of discrimination because of your genetic makeup.
  - jansan 3y ago
    That sounds like a very racist defintion of racism to me.
    - jl6 3y ago
      Redefining words is what a lot of the last ~10 years of polarization boils down to.
  - tourmalinetaco 3y ago
    Ironically, this is the exact same reasoning Neo-Nazis use for their hatred of the Jewish population. Weird how these parallels between extremist ideologies keep arising.
    - hotdogscout 3y ago
      It's almost like the "socialism" part of "national socialism" was not in fact irrelevant. See: Ba'aathism.
      - deleted 3y ago
        [deleted]

bunbun69 3y ago

Source?

fenomas 3y ago

Surely it's more likely that Google is just appending random keywords to incoming prompts, the same way DALLE used to do (or still does)?

tourmalinetaco 3y ago
It wouldn’t shock me either way, Google loves to both neuter products into uselessness and fuck with user inputs to skew results for what they deem is best for them.

gniv 3y ago

The troubling details are probably the racist things found on all the forums. Do you want your LLM to reflect that? I suspect Google overcompensated.

eadmund 3y ago

History? George Washington was always Black, Genghis Khan was always white, and Julius Caesar was always an albino Japanese woman. Also, Oceania has always been at war with Eastasia, war is peace and freedom is slavery. From my more substantive comment at https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39471003 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39471003: > The Ministry of Truth in Orwell’s 1984 would have loved this sort of thing. Why go to the work of manually rewriting history when you can just generate a new one on demand? … Generative AI should strive to be actually unbiased. That means it should not skew numbers in either direction, for anyone.

pram 3y ago
FWIW the government in 1984 actually had automated content generation, since thats how they produced pornography for the proles.