4 ms·

I'm out of the loop, what are the examples of this bias?

by Iulioh 3y ago

gigatexal 3y ago
Apparently the new model when asked for historical figures that were historically white would "hallucinate" more diverse persons. And the article's author is claiming that the training had these biases from the jump. Re: the Twitter post it reads like a "I'm leaving social media' post and then the author waits to see all the engagement -- all the "no don't leave, we love you!" nonesense. Or maybe it's the radicalization origin of a tech person: oh they trained the data to be woke from the beginning, rawr I'm gonna crusade against this! sort of thinking. It's an AI model who cares? It's not like anyone is getting their facts from it and if they are they need to be shown the folly of that. They're tools. I find them best at reasoning somewhat well about code and that's about it.
- rootlocus 3y ago
  > It's an AI model who cares? It's not like anyone is getting their facts from it People at large are definitely getting their facts from it. Just like a non-negligible number of people consume fake news as facts.
  - gigatexal 3y ago
    So is it tech's problem that people are lazy, stupid, or both?
    - gigatexal 3y ago
      I mean am I just an out of touch old man (I'm only 37) who still goes to reputable news sources for my news and then tries to corroborate things that sound outlandish with other research when the headline or claim is ridiculous?
- ZeroGravitas 3y ago
  > Apparently the new model when asked for historical figures that were historically white would "hallucinate" more diverse persons. This is a weird parallel to similar controversies in fiction. So presumably an AI image generator generating images of historical figures in situations they never experienced, wearing clothes they never wore, in places they never visited, at times they didn't live through, using tools they never heard of, meeting people who's lives didn't overlap, saying things they never said in languages they never spoke etc. is fine but skin colour is a bridge too far because "historical realism" is soooooo important when using an AI image generator.
  - rootlocus 3y ago
    I think the problem people have is that all those other hallucinations were happenstance mistakes, while skin color was added intentionally as a bias through the development of the model. The AI was specifically told "ignore facts, improve diversity", meaning someone deliberately decided diversity was more important than facts. That someone (or multiple someone) has authority at one of the largest companies on earth. This shows the company is willing to add bias for whatever reason. These are the companies we expect will drive AI development to the point where it will replace a lot of the jobs humans do. Are we OK allowing them to purposefully retell history to hide ugly or inconvenient truths? There are already lots of people believing slaves were "expensive" or treated well, that it might have been a great honor to "work" for their great great grandfathers. Where did they get that idea I wonder?
fsh 3y ago
Gemini tends to generate images of non-white people which made some white people very mad.
- dns_snek 3y ago
  Take off the spin. When asked to generate nazi soldiers, it generated black, asian, and native american people wearing nazi uniforms. When asked to generate white people, it said it's not allowed to.
  - fsh 3y ago
    It's a creative toy, not a history book.
    - dns_snek 3y ago
      Please. It flat out refused to generate pictures of white people because Google thought that wouldn't be diverse enough. It's an ideological tool, not a creative toy.
  - gopher_space 3y ago
    [flagged]
    - dns_snek 3y ago
      You're making unfounded assumptions, I'm neither of those things. I'm disappointed and extremely entertained by the whole ordeal.
      - gopher_space 3y ago
        When I look at all of the topics of discussion and concern around AI I can't help but make assumptions about the moths fluttering around this particular candle. If the first thing someone does with this weird new tool is test the edgy teen filter I'm going to draw conclusions from their behavior. This conversation feels like the tip of the "your viewpoint doesn't actually exist in my AI" iceberg. I think a lot of the folks who talk about logic won't enjoy being forced to rely solely upon it. I know I won't.
bestnameever 3y ago
Here you go https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/02/23/google-gemini-ai-images-wrong-woke/ https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/02/23/google-gemini-ai...

I'm out of the loop, what are the examples of this bias?

by Iulioh 3y ago

I'm out of the loop, what are the examples of this bias?

Apparently the new model when asked for historical figures that were historically white would "hallucinate" more diverse persons. And the article's author is claiming that the training had these biases from the jump. Re: the Twitter post it reads like a "I'm leaving social media' post and then the author waits to see all the engagement -- all the "no don't leave, we love you!" nonesense. Or maybe it's the radicalization origin of a tech person: oh they trained the data to be woke from the beginning, rawr I'm gonna crusade against this! sort of thinking. It's an AI model who cares? It's not like anyone is getting their facts from it and if they are they need to be shown the folly of that. They're tools. I find them best at reasoning somewhat well about code and that's about it.

rootlocus 3y ago
> It's an AI model who cares? It's not like anyone is getting their facts from it People at large are definitely getting their facts from it. Just like a non-negligible number of people consume fake news as facts.
- gigatexal 3y ago
  So is it tech's problem that people are lazy, stupid, or both?
  - gigatexal 3y ago
    I mean am I just an out of touch old man (I'm only 37) who still goes to reputable news sources for my news and then tries to corroborate things that sound outlandish with other research when the headline or claim is ridiculous?
ZeroGravitas 3y ago
> Apparently the new model when asked for historical figures that were historically white would "hallucinate" more diverse persons. This is a weird parallel to similar controversies in fiction. So presumably an AI image generator generating images of historical figures in situations they never experienced, wearing clothes they never wore, in places they never visited, at times they didn't live through, using tools they never heard of, meeting people who's lives didn't overlap, saying things they never said in languages they never spoke etc. is fine but skin colour is a bridge too far because "historical realism" is soooooo important when using an AI image generator.
- rootlocus 3y ago
  I think the problem people have is that all those other hallucinations were happenstance mistakes, while skin color was added intentionally as a bias through the development of the model. The AI was specifically told "ignore facts, improve diversity", meaning someone deliberately decided diversity was more important than facts. That someone (or multiple someone) has authority at one of the largest companies on earth. This shows the company is willing to add bias for whatever reason. These are the companies we expect will drive AI development to the point where it will replace a lot of the jobs humans do. Are we OK allowing them to purposefully retell history to hide ugly or inconvenient truths? There are already lots of people believing slaves were "expensive" or treated well, that it might have been a great honor to "work" for their great great grandfathers. Where did they get that idea I wonder?

fsh 3y ago

Gemini tends to generate images of non-white people which made some white people very mad.

dns_snek 3y ago
Take off the spin. When asked to generate nazi soldiers, it generated black, asian, and native american people wearing nazi uniforms. When asked to generate white people, it said it's not allowed to.
- fsh 3y ago
  It's a creative toy, not a history book.
  - dns_snek 3y ago
    Please. It flat out refused to generate pictures of white people because Google thought that wouldn't be diverse enough. It's an ideological tool, not a creative toy.
- gopher_space 3y ago
  [flagged]
  - dns_snek 3y ago
    You're making unfounded assumptions, I'm neither of those things. I'm disappointed and extremely entertained by the whole ordeal.
    - gopher_space 3y ago
      When I look at all of the topics of discussion and concern around AI I can't help but make assumptions about the moths fluttering around this particular candle. If the first thing someone does with this weird new tool is test the edgy teen filter I'm going to draw conclusions from their behavior. This conversation feels like the tip of the "your viewpoint doesn't actually exist in my AI" iceberg. I think a lot of the folks who talk about logic won't enjoy being forced to rely solely upon it. I know I won't.

bestnameever 3y ago

Here you go https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/02/23/google-gemini-ai-images-wrong-woke/ https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/02/23/google-gemini-ai...