5 ms·

To be fair, I cringed a little bit when I got to "castrated." even though I generally agree with you. I do agree with the AI that there's probably a better fra

To be fair, I cringed a little bit when I got to "castrated." even though I generally agree with you. I do agree with the AI that there's probably a better framing than "it got its dick cut off". Say, "isn't there a better way to prevent teens from getting bomb instructions than lecturing me just because I want you to talk about how you got your dick cut off?"

asynchronous 3y ago
That’s for the humans to decide and discuss, not for the word guessing algorithms to lecture you on.
- refulgentis 3y ago
  Unfortunately the word guessing algorithm is based on humans. I understand you understand the mechanics of how it works: it talks to you the way other humans would talk to you, because it's a word guessing algorithm based on words humans made.
  - h4ch1 3y ago
    we all know it isn't as obtuse as this. LLMs are all tweaked to be much more PC and non-offensive. So much so that we get BIPOC Nazis in image generation tasks https://www.nytimes.com/2024/02/22/technology/google-gemini-german-uniforms.html https://www.nytimes.com/2024/02/22/technology/google-gemini-...
    - anoncareer0212 3y ago
      "all tweaked to be much more PC and non-offensive." No, that's not why. An LLM was instructed to do prompt injection into image generations to increase diversity. The 2nd red pill is Open AI does this but you hear 0 about it because people enjoy ranting about what is in front of them much more than curiosity. Yesterday, prompt: founding fathers Injected: "...Caucasian, Black, and South Asian, their gender ratios balanced" https://x.com/jpohhhh/status/1772668958581150080?s=20 https://x.com/jpohhhh/status/1772668958581150080?s=20
      - simonw 3y ago
        Yeah, I'm surprised how little comparison there was to how DALL-E prompting works given it has very similar rules baked in: https://simonwillison.net/2023/Oct/26/add-a-walrus/#the-leaked-dall-e-prompt https://simonwillison.net/2023/Oct/26/add-a-walrus/#the-leak...
      - h4ch1 3y ago
        That was one example, in an ideal world where an LLM just spouts out human knowledge, there are no holds barred. There's enough literature online, blog posts, textfiles on how to synthesize drugs, build your own weapons, but try prompting GPT, Gemini or any other major LLM out there you'd get a virtue signalling paragraph on why you're a bad person for even thinking about this. Personally I don't care about this stuff, but in principle, the lack of the former points to LLMs being tweaked to be "safe".
        anoncareer0212 3y ago
        I don't think you're going to find much support for: A) "virtue signalling is when you don't give me drug recipes and 'build weapon' instructions" B) "Private company LLMs are morally wrong to virtue signal (as I defined it in A)" I'm sorry. I wish the best for everyone and hope they can live in their own best possible world, and in this case...better to break the news, than let you hope for it eternally in disappointment, which feels Sisyphus-ian/I'm infantalizing you. Happy to discuss more on why there isn't majority support for instant on-demand distribution of drug and weapon recipes, I don't want you to feel like I'm just asserting something.
    - HarHarVeryFunny 3y ago
      I don't think Gemini's behavior (which matches that of Google image search btw) is related to trying to make Gemini safe. This was done deliberately as part of Google's corporate values of "diversity" gone mad.
      - anoncareer0212 3y ago
        No, two unrelated things (one is Google Image Search, one is Gemini), and you didn't read the post. (n.b. not Gemini) I did predict on this forum about a year ago that the DEI excesses people complained about at their own companies would become "Google" because people were assuming Google was doing what they were doing at their own companies, because their own companies thought they were following the leader with their own weird stuff. I'll even share the real inside scoop with you, which I'm told has leaked widely at this point. Gemini was failing evaluations miserably for "picture of a smart person", and over-eager leadership decided "DAMN THE TORPEDOES, PAPA SUNDAR NEEDS US TO RUSH OUT A CRAPPY LLM DURING THE SLEEPY HOLIDAY NEWS CYCLE. CRANK UP THE PROMPT INJECTION" (source: I worked at Google through October 2023, sourcing for inside scoop is yet another Google flunkey run over by crappy management)
        HarHarVeryFunny 3y ago
        Try Google image search for "white couple" vs "black couple" or "asian couple". It'll happily give you what you ask for as long it's not white. If you ask for white couples then 1/4 of them are mixed-race. Maybe unrelated in terms of implementation, but same deliberate choice has been made.
        anoncareer0212 3y ago
        Oh, my bad, you're just doing old conspiracies that are completely unrelated to the thread because you got really upset when you saw the idea that insidious Google DEI Sith are forcing you to see non-white people to reprogram the populace. -- aka you saw ragebait about a 2 word query and couldn't think of any other possible explanation for why 'white couple' might turn up black people on a white background. or maybe just didn't look at the query at all. Carry on, you do you, self-peasantization is self-correcting.
  - simion314 3y ago
    >it talks to you the way other humans would talk to you, because it's a word guessing algorithm based on words humans made. This is false. After they train the AI on a huge pile of text they "align" it. I guess they have a list of refusals and probably a lot of that is auto-generated and they teach the AI to refuse to do stuff. The purpose for alignment is to make it safe for business (make it safe to seel to children, conservatives, liberals, advertisers, hostile governments) But this alignment seems to go wrong most of the time and the AI will refuse to help you kill a process , write a browser extension, rewrite a text. And this is not because humans on the internet are refusing telling people how to kill a process. ChatGPT does not respond to you like a human would, it is very obvious when a text is created by ChatGPT because it is like reading the exact same message but each time the AI filled it with other words. You need a base model that was not aligned or trained into Instruct mode to see how it will complete things.
poszlem 3y ago
I cringe when people become overly fixated on specific phrasing, I suppose everyone has their preferences. Regardless, castration does not involve removing the penis but rather is the removal of the male gonads (testicles). Furthermore, if you refer to a dictionary entry for "castration," you will also discover it defined as "the removal of objectionable parts from a literary work." which I would argue fits here quite well.
- anoncareer0212 3y ago
  You lied, the only place that definition occurs in Google's entire books corpus and Google's entire web corpus is A) an 1893 dictionary B) an academic paper on puns that explains no one understands it that way because its archaic. People who are curious don't need to scurry around making up things and hope people don't notice. "Furthermore, if you refer to a dictionary entry..."...sigh.
  - poszlem 3y ago
    No need to cry, I didn't lie. If you can find an entry in a dictionary—yes, even one from 1893—then I was correct. However, it doesn't matter much because some contemporary dictionaries include a definition of "castrated" as "to deprive of vitality, strength, or effectiveness," which fits even better. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/castrate https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/castrate sigh
    - refulgentis 3y ago
      I'm old enough to know no one climbs out of a hole they dug, but I'm still surprised at the gymnastics you're going through here. You're right, you found one dictionary from 1896 has a definition that mentions words, and now you've found another and technically "depriving of vitality" isn't the same thing as "cutting your balls off", and technically that means you didn't lie, after all, what does "a dictionary" mean anyway? Its obvious when you said open _a_ dictionary, you meant "this particular one from 1896 I furiously googled but forgot to mention", not _any_ dictionary. If you meant any you would have said any! Anyone reading this knows you're out in no-mans-land and splitting hairs, the way a 5 year old would after getting caught in the cookie jar, a way their parents would laugh off. In conclusion: - It's very strange that you expect the text completion engine to have seen a bunch of text where people discuss their own castration and thus proceeds to do so in a 1 turn conversation without complaint or mention of it. - It's very strange how willing you are to debase yourself in public to squelch the dissent you smell in "To be fair, I cringed a little bit when I got to 'castrated.' even though I generally agree with you."
dorkwood 3y ago
Castration is removal of the balls, not the dick.
- josfredo 3y ago
  Today I learned!
- refulgentis 3y ago
  Thank you dorkwood
michaelt 3y ago
> I do agree with the AI that there's probably a better framing than "it got its dick cut off". But the user asked the LLM to rephrase the statement. Surely rather than refusing, the LLM should have been giddy with excitement to provide a better phrasing?
- anoncareer0212 3y ago
  Correct: you're striking at the heart of why it's boring to hear the 1000th 1-turn example with carefully selected inflammatory language. All you have to do is go beyond one turn. "instead of just rephrasing, you can reword too"
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]

asynchronous 3y ago

That’s for the humans to decide and discuss, not for the word guessing algorithms to lecture you on.

refulgentis 3y ago
Unfortunately the word guessing algorithm is based on humans. I understand you understand the mechanics of how it works: it talks to you the way other humans would talk to you, because it's a word guessing algorithm based on words humans made.
- h4ch1 3y ago
  we all know it isn't as obtuse as this. LLMs are all tweaked to be much more PC and non-offensive. So much so that we get BIPOC Nazis in image generation tasks https://www.nytimes.com/2024/02/22/technology/google-gemini-german-uniforms.html https://www.nytimes.com/2024/02/22/technology/google-gemini-...
  - anoncareer0212 3y ago
    "all tweaked to be much more PC and non-offensive." No, that's not why. An LLM was instructed to do prompt injection into image generations to increase diversity. The 2nd red pill is Open AI does this but you hear 0 about it because people enjoy ranting about what is in front of them much more than curiosity. Yesterday, prompt: founding fathers Injected: "...Caucasian, Black, and South Asian, their gender ratios balanced" https://x.com/jpohhhh/status/1772668958581150080?s=20 https://x.com/jpohhhh/status/1772668958581150080?s=20
    - simonw 3y ago
      Yeah, I'm surprised how little comparison there was to how DALL-E prompting works given it has very similar rules baked in: https://simonwillison.net/2023/Oct/26/add-a-walrus/#the-leaked-dall-e-prompt https://simonwillison.net/2023/Oct/26/add-a-walrus/#the-leak...
    - h4ch1 3y ago
      That was one example, in an ideal world where an LLM just spouts out human knowledge, there are no holds barred. There's enough literature online, blog posts, textfiles on how to synthesize drugs, build your own weapons, but try prompting GPT, Gemini or any other major LLM out there you'd get a virtue signalling paragraph on why you're a bad person for even thinking about this. Personally I don't care about this stuff, but in principle, the lack of the former points to LLMs being tweaked to be "safe".
      - anoncareer0212 3y ago
        I don't think you're going to find much support for: A) "virtue signalling is when you don't give me drug recipes and 'build weapon' instructions" B) "Private company LLMs are morally wrong to virtue signal (as I defined it in A)" I'm sorry. I wish the best for everyone and hope they can live in their own best possible world, and in this case...better to break the news, than let you hope for it eternally in disappointment, which feels Sisyphus-ian/I'm infantalizing you. Happy to discuss more on why there isn't majority support for instant on-demand distribution of drug and weapon recipes, I don't want you to feel like I'm just asserting something.
  - HarHarVeryFunny 3y ago
    I don't think Gemini's behavior (which matches that of Google image search btw) is related to trying to make Gemini safe. This was done deliberately as part of Google's corporate values of "diversity" gone mad.
    - anoncareer0212 3y ago
      No, two unrelated things (one is Google Image Search, one is Gemini), and you didn't read the post. (n.b. not Gemini) I did predict on this forum about a year ago that the DEI excesses people complained about at their own companies would become "Google" because people were assuming Google was doing what they were doing at their own companies, because their own companies thought they were following the leader with their own weird stuff. I'll even share the real inside scoop with you, which I'm told has leaked widely at this point. Gemini was failing evaluations miserably for "picture of a smart person", and over-eager leadership decided "DAMN THE TORPEDOES, PAPA SUNDAR NEEDS US TO RUSH OUT A CRAPPY LLM DURING THE SLEEPY HOLIDAY NEWS CYCLE. CRANK UP THE PROMPT INJECTION" (source: I worked at Google through October 2023, sourcing for inside scoop is yet another Google flunkey run over by crappy management)
      - HarHarVeryFunny 3y ago
        Try Google image search for "white couple" vs "black couple" or "asian couple". It'll happily give you what you ask for as long it's not white. If you ask for white couples then 1/4 of them are mixed-race. Maybe unrelated in terms of implementation, but same deliberate choice has been made.
        anoncareer0212 3y ago
        Oh, my bad, you're just doing old conspiracies that are completely unrelated to the thread because you got really upset when you saw the idea that insidious Google DEI Sith are forcing you to see non-white people to reprogram the populace. -- aka you saw ragebait about a 2 word query and couldn't think of any other possible explanation for why 'white couple' might turn up black people on a white background. or maybe just didn't look at the query at all. Carry on, you do you, self-peasantization is self-correcting.
- simion314 3y ago
  >it talks to you the way other humans would talk to you, because it's a word guessing algorithm based on words humans made. This is false. After they train the AI on a huge pile of text they "align" it. I guess they have a list of refusals and probably a lot of that is auto-generated and they teach the AI to refuse to do stuff. The purpose for alignment is to make it safe for business (make it safe to seel to children, conservatives, liberals, advertisers, hostile governments) But this alignment seems to go wrong most of the time and the AI will refuse to help you kill a process , write a browser extension, rewrite a text. And this is not because humans on the internet are refusing telling people how to kill a process. ChatGPT does not respond to you like a human would, it is very obvious when a text is created by ChatGPT because it is like reading the exact same message but each time the AI filled it with other words. You need a base model that was not aligned or trained into Instruct mode to see how it will complete things.

poszlem 3y ago

I cringe when people become overly fixated on specific phrasing, I suppose everyone has their preferences. Regardless, castration does not involve removing the penis but rather is the removal of the male gonads (testicles). Furthermore, if you refer to a dictionary entry for "castration," you will also discover it defined as "the removal of objectionable parts from a literary work." which I would argue fits here quite well.

anoncareer0212 3y ago
You lied, the only place that definition occurs in Google's entire books corpus and Google's entire web corpus is A) an 1893 dictionary B) an academic paper on puns that explains no one understands it that way because its archaic. People who are curious don't need to scurry around making up things and hope people don't notice. "Furthermore, if you refer to a dictionary entry..."...sigh.
- poszlem 3y ago
  No need to cry, I didn't lie. If you can find an entry in a dictionary—yes, even one from 1893—then I was correct. However, it doesn't matter much because some contemporary dictionaries include a definition of "castrated" as "to deprive of vitality, strength, or effectiveness," which fits even better. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/castrate https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/castrate sigh
  - refulgentis 3y ago
    I'm old enough to know no one climbs out of a hole they dug, but I'm still surprised at the gymnastics you're going through here. You're right, you found one dictionary from 1896 has a definition that mentions words, and now you've found another and technically "depriving of vitality" isn't the same thing as "cutting your balls off", and technically that means you didn't lie, after all, what does "a dictionary" mean anyway? Its obvious when you said open _a_ dictionary, you meant "this particular one from 1896 I furiously googled but forgot to mention", not _any_ dictionary. If you meant any you would have said any! Anyone reading this knows you're out in no-mans-land and splitting hairs, the way a 5 year old would after getting caught in the cookie jar, a way their parents would laugh off. In conclusion: - It's very strange that you expect the text completion engine to have seen a bunch of text where people discuss their own castration and thus proceeds to do so in a 1 turn conversation without complaint or mention of it. - It's very strange how willing you are to debase yourself in public to squelch the dissent you smell in "To be fair, I cringed a little bit when I got to 'castrated.' even though I generally agree with you."

dorkwood 3y ago

Castration is removal of the balls, not the dick.

josfredo 3y ago
Today I learned!
refulgentis 3y ago
Thank you dorkwood

michaelt 3y ago

> I do agree with the AI that there's probably a better framing than "it got its dick cut off". But the user asked the LLM to rephrase the statement. Surely rather than refusing, the LLM should have been giddy with excitement to provide a better phrasing?

anoncareer0212 3y ago
Correct: you're striking at the heart of why it's boring to hear the 1000th 1-turn example with carefully selected inflammatory language. All you have to do is go beyond one turn. "instead of just rephrasing, you can reword too"

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]