3 ms·

Why won't a big player just bite the bullet and release "unsafe" models? The backlash can't be worse than creating crippled products that will be surpassed by c

by haolez 3y ago

Why won't a big player just bite the bullet and release "unsafe" models? The backlash can't be worse than creating crippled products that will be surpassed by competitors (from the US and the rest of the world). What additional risks would a free model add to something like Google Search?

ep103 3y ago
child porn?
- fieryskiff17 3y ago
  [dead]
- haolez 3y ago
  Are you talking about AI generation? It's absolutely disgusting and absurd, but generated child porn doesn't involve an actual child having its life destroyed. It's extremely uncomfortable to talk about this, but even this extreme case doesn't seem to support the argument against free models.
  - pixl97 3y ago
    >but generated child porn doesn't involve an actual child having its life destroyed. Put frankly, the law gives zero fucks about that. Looks like child = jail is the law in many countries in which Google operates.
  - cdelsolar 3y ago
    How would they train such a model?
- Waterluvian 3y ago
  There’s already a ridiculous amount of that being generated by individuals at home. /b/ moderation took much too long to adjust their enforcement behaviours.
  - pixl97 3y ago
    And, so? To be graphic as possible, if your commercial AI application generates childporn you will be fistfucked by the long arm of the law in at least the US, Canada, and Japan. While chasing individuals is more difficult for law enforcement a big juicy target like Google could rack up billions in fines.
    - Waterluvian 3y ago
      True. Just because you don’t need a big player to go nuts, doesn’t mean them doing it wouldn’t be a lightning rod.
- sham1 3y ago
  I feel that for this kind of AI stuff, the company behind the model could probably argue that they're not liable for what the individual user generates. So that for example with CSAM, that as long as they make sure that the training data doesn't contain that stuff, they probably should be fine and not be liable and/or criminally prosecuted. Of course, an actual lawyer could probably explain why this would be a bad idea, but at least I as a non-lawyer don't see where the problem lies (aside from the fact that the company wouldn't want their stuff to be used to create CSAM, which is fair).
  - ADeerAppeared 3y ago
    They are not liable for what the user generates, sure. That is a plausible legal argument. But these AI systems do not just generate CSAM by happenstance or the user tricking them into doing it. These systems have their training data obtained by scraping everything off the internet. There is a lot of CSAM (and whatever you will call text/literature describing such things) on the internet, and so, in the training data. OpenAI had some of their Kenyan data tagging partners quit the contract because they had to tag which images and text were CSAM. (With none of the already-insufficient mental health resources afforded to social media moderation staff)
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
pixl97 3y ago
>The backlash can't be worse Everyone says that until they are in civil/criminal court getting millions/billions in fines.
- DinaCoder99 3y ago
  [dead]
- p1esk 3y ago
  Can’t be worse than releasing Full Self Driving (beta) software and allowing it to control your car on public roads.
Tool_of_Society 3y ago
Remember Tay the twitter ai chat bot that went full nazi and shit in like 15 hours? The media would be all over google once someone used it to create something "disturbing"..
- mewpmewp2 3y ago
  Actually that is a good example. Did it seriously affect MSFT? It seemed like most just had a laugh. They look fine now.
  - bpiche 3y ago
    It was 4 hours, not 15, and it didn’t really, because although msft took it down in the west, they never took it down in china where it’s known as ‘Zo’. But there’s no lesson to be learned here, there is far far more at stake now
michaelt 3y ago
> The backlash can't be worse than creating crippled products that will be surpassed by competitors Of course it can. Like 50% of efforts in safety are to stop the model outputting popular lies, oft-repeated software bugs and slanderous hallucinated falsehoods. If Mistral puts out a model it's only downloaded by enthusiasts who understand its limitations, and doesn't get a load of scrutiny from journalists in the way Apple and Google products do. If sometimes it falsely claims Richard Stallman was arrested for lassoing a police officer - Mistral won't see any blowback from that. On the other hand, if Google released that model, and pushed it hard in search and whatnot, so search results started including such false claims - that's going to get a lot more notice.
- haolez 3y ago
  So what? The user must be responsible in the model's usage, or else some law will apply. The company is not liable for misuse. And for things like "repeating bugs", maybe the model won't do that anymore if we focus on making it more capable and smart? I believe OpenAI stated that the guard rails in GPT-4 made the "sparks of AGI" phenomenon disappear. That's just bizarre reasoning for these companies, in my opinion.

by haolez 3y ago

ep103 3y ago

child porn?

fieryskiff17 3y ago
[dead]
haolez 3y ago
Are you talking about AI generation? It's absolutely disgusting and absurd, but generated child porn doesn't involve an actual child having its life destroyed. It's extremely uncomfortable to talk about this, but even this extreme case doesn't seem to support the argument against free models.
- pixl97 3y ago
  >but generated child porn doesn't involve an actual child having its life destroyed. Put frankly, the law gives zero fucks about that. Looks like child = jail is the law in many countries in which Google operates.
- cdelsolar 3y ago
  How would they train such a model?
Waterluvian 3y ago
There’s already a ridiculous amount of that being generated by individuals at home. /b/ moderation took much too long to adjust their enforcement behaviours.
- pixl97 3y ago
  And, so? To be graphic as possible, if your commercial AI application generates childporn you will be fistfucked by the long arm of the law in at least the US, Canada, and Japan. While chasing individuals is more difficult for law enforcement a big juicy target like Google could rack up billions in fines.
  - Waterluvian 3y ago
    True. Just because you don’t need a big player to go nuts, doesn’t mean them doing it wouldn’t be a lightning rod.
sham1 3y ago
I feel that for this kind of AI stuff, the company behind the model could probably argue that they're not liable for what the individual user generates. So that for example with CSAM, that as long as they make sure that the training data doesn't contain that stuff, they probably should be fine and not be liable and/or criminally prosecuted. Of course, an actual lawyer could probably explain why this would be a bad idea, but at least I as a non-lawyer don't see where the problem lies (aside from the fact that the company wouldn't want their stuff to be used to create CSAM, which is fair).
- ADeerAppeared 3y ago
  They are not liable for what the user generates, sure. That is a plausible legal argument. But these AI systems do not just generate CSAM by happenstance or the user tricking them into doing it. These systems have their training data obtained by scraping everything off the internet. There is a lot of CSAM (and whatever you will call text/literature describing such things) on the internet, and so, in the training data. OpenAI had some of their Kenyan data tagging partners quit the contract because they had to tag which images and text were CSAM. (With none of the already-insufficient mental health resources afforded to social media moderation staff)
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]

pixl97 3y ago

>The backlash can't be worse Everyone says that until they are in civil/criminal court getting millions/billions in fines.

DinaCoder99 3y ago
[dead]
p1esk 3y ago
Can’t be worse than releasing Full Self Driving (beta) software and allowing it to control your car on public roads.

Tool_of_Society 3y ago

Remember Tay the twitter ai chat bot that went full nazi and shit in like 15 hours? The media would be all over google once someone used it to create something "disturbing"..

mewpmewp2 3y ago
Actually that is a good example. Did it seriously affect MSFT? It seemed like most just had a laugh. They look fine now.
- bpiche 3y ago
  It was 4 hours, not 15, and it didn’t really, because although msft took it down in the west, they never took it down in china where it’s known as ‘Zo’. But there’s no lesson to be learned here, there is far far more at stake now

michaelt 3y ago

> The backlash can't be worse than creating crippled products that will be surpassed by competitors Of course it can. Like 50% of efforts in safety are to stop the model outputting popular lies, oft-repeated software bugs and slanderous hallucinated falsehoods. If Mistral puts out a model it's only downloaded by enthusiasts who understand its limitations, and doesn't get a load of scrutiny from journalists in the way Apple and Google products do. If sometimes it falsely claims Richard Stallman was arrested for lassoing a police officer - Mistral won't see any blowback from that. On the other hand, if Google released that model, and pushed it hard in search and whatnot, so search results started including such false claims - that's going to get a lot more notice.

haolez 3y ago
So what? The user must be responsible in the model's usage, or else some law will apply. The company is not liable for misuse. And for things like "repeating bugs", maybe the model won't do that anymore if we focus on making it more capable and smart? I believe OpenAI stated that the guard rails in GPT-4 made the "sparks of AGI" phenomenon disappear. That's just bizarre reasoning for these companies, in my opinion.