29 ms·
I'm sympathetic to your point. I think Corpos have too much power. However, on this precise subject I really don't see what to do about it. The state can't mand
by nathan_compton 2y ago
I'm sympathetic to your point. I think Corpos have too much power. However, on this precise subject I really don't see what to do about it. The state can't mandate that they don't censor their models. Indeed, there is no good definition at all of what not-censoring these models actually means. What is and is not allowed content? I tend to be rather libertarian on this subject, but if I were running a corporation I'd want to censor our models purely for business reasons.
Even if you were to make the absurd suggestion that you have a right to the most state of the art language model, that still just puts the censorship in the hands of the state.
- qball 2y ago>The state can't mandate that they don't censor their models. Sure they can; all they need to do is refuse to do business with companies that don't offer uncensored models to their general public or withhold industry development funding until one is released (this is how the US Federal government enforces a minimum drinking age despite that being beyond its purview to impose).
- nathan_compton 2y agoWhat does it mean to _not_ censor a model? That is the rub: is it censoring the model to exclude adult content from the training data? Is reinforcement learning to make the model friendly censorship? These models are tools and as tools they are tuned to do particular things and to not do other ones. There is no objective way to characterize what a censored model is.