4 ms·
I agree with everything you wrote, it's the mindset I wish people would have. One note, though, in this case, it wasn't the generative AI that was racist, it's
by serial_dev 3y ago
I agree with everything you wrote, it's the mindset I wish people would have.
One note, though, in this case, it wasn't the generative AI that was racist, it's the people who added the extra configuration of not allowing (or at the very least, strongly discouraging) white people in their images. The racism wasn't a bug (like in the past with the gorilla incident), this time it was a feature that was deliberately put there.
- somethoughts 3y agoFrom a game theory perspective, Sundar's approach is actually probably the safest approach. If they didn't add the "over the top" diversity and inclusion filter, Gemini would probably not be given a second chance if the twitter-verse was able to generate anything remotely objectionable as presently the diversity and inclusion crowd has somewhat captured social media, etc. and is quite vocal and experienced w.r.t. canceling people/companies/things. If Google adds the diversity and inclusion filters and the social media influencers/stock market want it to be less filtered, then Gemini gets to live another day. The Gemini team can go in retro-actively and remove the diversity and inclusion filters and Sundar can write an apology letter. Then if the Gemini team goes too far in the opposite direction, there is precedence to apologize again as they fine tune it.
- xk_id 3y agoThat is actually excellent PR. I would also add there was a more minor benefit from causing a reaction on social media in the first place, which indirectly advertised their product.