3 ms·
> I for one welcome new technology to reduce human error and biases. That assumes the technology does not contain those very biases, which we know is exactly w
by janice1999 2y ago
> I for one welcome new technology to reduce human error and biases.
That assumes the technology does not contain those very biases, which we know is exactly what happens with LLMs. Maybe Axon have fair and unbiased datasets but unless they are forced to reveal that in court, no one will ever know.
- bko 2y agoI think its easier to program LLMs than humans. You can change the dataset, or have explicit prompts to remove biases. Just look at how Google got their LLMs to re-imagine the founding fathers to remove bias.
- janice1999 2y ago> You can change the dataset To what though? Datasets are not easy to create - why do you think they are almost all based on archives of stolen books and videos? Is Axon really going to spend millions to curate billions of words of English conversations free of racial bias for example? The same goes for voice recognition. Is the model for a woman with a thick regional accent ever going to be as good as a man speaking British English without significant investment? > Just look at how Google got their LLMs to re-imagine the founding fathers to remove bias. I can't tell if this is sarcasm or not since it is such a perfect example of unintended consequences and hubris.
- bko 2y agoAgain, easier to do prompt engineering than to engineer humans. The human also hears the thick regional accent. At least with computers you can control the medium or what they are aware of (maybe normalize the voice, or convert to text). Every example of bias I can imagine is infinitely more difficult to address with humans than AI models.