4 ms·

The bias in the model took years to craft. Probably hundreds of engineers over many years built the system that crafted the data sets required to do censorship.

foldr 3y ago
Clearly Google don't want Gemini to draw black Vikings. That's just a mistake. I don't know enough about tweaking AIs to say whether it's a dumb mistake or the sort of mistake that's very difficult to avoid without making other, equally serious mistakes. But it's definitely not a political conspiracy.
- ldjkfkdsjnv 3y ago
  One of the largest, most bureaucratic, but also most sophisticated companies, did not catch that? Ofcourse they did. The level of approvals to release this model must have been insane.
  - red-iron-pine 3y ago
    a large org like this would have spent years of man-hours spent in requirements, functional and NFR, then regression testing and acceptance testing, multiple levels of sign-off required, change request approvals, etc.
    - foldr 3y ago
      And yet lots of Google products get released with bugs. Buggy software is the default. Elaborate explanations are not required. In concrete terms, what exactly could Google have hoped to gain from releasing an image generator that defaults to black Vikings? If it wasn't a mistake, what is the grand plan that it contributes to? And why has Google immediately about-faced and abandoned this plan? Did they think everyone would love the black Vikings? In any case, the entire premise of this confected outrage (that AIs should be expected to produce historically accurate images for arbitrary inputs) is completely daft.
Aliabid94 3y ago
Almost certainly this is some prompt post processing, where the prompt is appended with “Make the image diverse in race and gender”. This is a trivial fix and not baked into the weights. However removing this would almost certainly surface the actual overrepresentation of “men as lawyers, women as nurses” etc. in the training data and thus the weights. Google tried a simple hack to remove this bias via prompt engineering. It’s stupid but overplayed

foldr 3y ago

Clearly Google don't want Gemini to draw black Vikings. That's just a mistake. I don't know enough about tweaking AIs to say whether it's a dumb mistake or the sort of mistake that's very difficult to avoid without making other, equally serious mistakes. But it's definitely not a political conspiracy.

ldjkfkdsjnv 3y ago
One of the largest, most bureaucratic, but also most sophisticated companies, did not catch that? Ofcourse they did. The level of approvals to release this model must have been insane.
- red-iron-pine 3y ago
  a large org like this would have spent years of man-hours spent in requirements, functional and NFR, then regression testing and acceptance testing, multiple levels of sign-off required, change request approvals, etc.
  - foldr 3y ago
    And yet lots of Google products get released with bugs. Buggy software is the default. Elaborate explanations are not required. In concrete terms, what exactly could Google have hoped to gain from releasing an image generator that defaults to black Vikings? If it wasn't a mistake, what is the grand plan that it contributes to? And why has Google immediately about-faced and abandoned this plan? Did they think everyone would love the black Vikings? In any case, the entire premise of this confected outrage (that AIs should be expected to produce historically accurate images for arbitrary inputs) is completely daft.

Aliabid94 3y ago

Almost certainly this is some prompt post processing, where the prompt is appended with “Make the image diverse in race and gender”. This is a trivial fix and not baked into the weights. However removing this would almost certainly surface the actual overrepresentation of “men as lawyers, women as nurses” etc. in the training data and thus the weights. Google tried a simple hack to remove this bias via prompt engineering. It’s stupid but overplayed