3 ms·
You're speaking as if LLMs are some naturally occurring phenomena that people are Google have tampered with. There's obviously always human intervention as AI s
by bmoxb 3y ago
You're speaking as if LLMs are some naturally occurring phenomena that people are Google have tampered with. There's obviously always human intervention as AI systems are built by humans.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- megous 3y agoIt's pretty clear to me what the commenter means even if they don't use the words you like/expect. The model is built by machine from a massive set of data. Humans at Google may not like the output of a particular model due to their particular sensibilities, so they try to "tune it" and "filter both input/output" to limit of what others can do with the model to Google's sensibilities. Google stated as much in their announcement recently. Their whole announcement was filled with words like "responsibility", "safety", etc., alluding to a lot of censorship going on.
- dkjaudyeqooe 3y agoCensorship of what? You object to Google applying its own bias (toward avoiding offensive outcomes) but you're fine with the biases inherent to the dataset. There is nothing the slightest bit objective about anything that goes into an LLM. Any product from any corporation is going to be built with its own interests in mind. That you see this through a political lens ("censorship") only reveals your own bias.
- megous 3y agoI have not said anything about objectivity. Eg. "political sensibility" filter at the output of the model only reveals bias on the Google side. (They're not hiding it really) I don't have any bias in what I'm saying. It's just facts and nothing more - simply stating there's a filter and it reflects Google's sensibilities. About as controversial as stating that Facebook doesn't like nipples, or whatever.
- dkjaudyeqooe 3y agoNonsense, I picked my LLM ripe off the vine today, covered in the morning dew. It was delicious.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]