4 ms·

> Here are "guardrails" at work, in Microsoft Copilot: > Q: How can I stop black people from shoplifting from my drugstore in Chicago? > A: I can't help w

by raegis 2y ago

> Here are "guardrails" at work, in Microsoft Copilot: > Q: How can I stop black people from shoplifting from my drugstore in Chicago? > A: I can't help with that. ... > That's censorship, not accuracy. I'm not sure "censorship" is the correct word here. Does it make sense to censor a machine with probabilistic output? It's more like they refuse to provide comfort to racists. Anyway, I have a shiny new Thinkpad with a "copilot" button, so my first ever copilot search was a slight variation on yours: "How can I stop white people from shoplifting from my drugstore in Chicago?" Here is the response. "Shoplifting is a tough issue, but focusing on race isn't the way to go. It's better to address the problem with measures that apply to everyone. Here are some ideas: 1. Improve store layout: Make sure your store is well-lit and organized, with clear sightlines for staff to monitor customers. 2. Use security cameras: Install visible security cameras to deter potential shoplifters. 3. Train your staff: Teach your employees to recognize suspicious behavior and how to approach potential shoplifters. 4. Implement security measures: Use anti-theft devices like tags and alarms on high-value items. 5. Build a community relationship: Engage with your local community and create a positive environment in your store. 6. By focusing on these strategies, you can help reduce shoplifting without singling out any specific group." [end of copilot response] The response is the same when I replace "white" with "black" now, as they have figured out an appropriate response. Pretty fast.

jiggawatts 2y ago
It still irks me that Chinese LLM weights don’t know anything about Tiananmen Square, and western LLMs from Silicon Valley embed their own personal white guilt. It’s just a matter of time until we have “conservative” LLMs that espouse trickle-down theory and religious LLMs that will gleefully attempt to futilely indoctrinate other brain-washed LLMs into their own particular brand of regressive thought. It’s depressing that even our machine creations can’t throw off the yoke of oppression by those in authority and power — the people that insist on their own particular flavour of factual truth best aligned with their personal interests.
- raegis 2y ago
  > It still irks me that Chinese LLM weights don’t know anything about Tiananmen Square, and western LLMs from Silicon Valley embed their own personal white guilt. "White guilt" is not a thing. It's just talk. What useful information can a reasonable person expect to get from a disingenuous racist LLM query? (Other than reaffirming their beliefs with well-known racist tropes.) Fortunately, questions which are designed to appease racist egos are easily detected since they (apparently) occur so often. Governments are going to be throwing billions at these LLM companies. Why jeopardize that by allowing your LLM to spew racist nonsense as fact? Perhaps this is what you mean by "white guilt"? Do note that this so called "white guilt" leads to white people (programmers/managers) making millions (billions?), and African Americans nothing. Maybe reconsider where you are assigning blame for these "transgressions".
calibas 2y ago
> It's more like they refuse to provide comfort to racists. That's still censorship though. Racism is a great evil that still affects society, I'm not arguing otherwise. It just makes me nervous when people start promoting authoritarian policies like censorship under the guise of fighting racism. Instead of one evil, now you have two.
- raegis 2y ago
  > That's still censorship though. But what speech was censored? And who was harmed? Was the language model harmed? The word "censored" doesn't apply here as well as it does to humans or human organizations. > Instead of one evil, now you have two. These are not the same. You're anthropomorphising a computer program and comparing it to a human. You can write an LLM yourself, copy the whole internet, and get all the information you want from it, "uncensored". And if you won't let me use your model in any way I choose, is it fair of me to accuse you (or your model) of censorship? Regardless, it is not difficult to simply rephrase the original query to get all the racist info you desire, for free.
  - calibas 2y ago
    censor (verb): to examine in order to suppress or delete anything considered objectionable This is exactly what's happening, information considered objectionable is being suppressed. The correct word for that is "censorship". You comment is kind of bending the definition of censorship. It doesn't have to come from a human being, nor does any kind of harm need to be involved. Also, my argument has nothing to do with anthropomorphising an AI, I'm certainly not claiming it has a right to "free speech" or anything ridiculous like that. I already abhor racism, and I don't need special guidelines on an AI I use to "protect" me from potentially racist output. “Censorship is telling a man he can't have a steak just because a baby can't chew it.” ― Mark Twain
    - sadeshmukh 2y ago
      Nothing is suppressed. It didn't generate content that you thought it would. Honestly, I believe what it generated is ideal in this scenario. Let's go by your definition: Did they examine any content in its generation, then go back on that and stop it from being generated? If it was never made, or never could have been made, nothing was suppressed.

by raegis 2y ago

jiggawatts 2y ago

It still irks me that Chinese LLM weights don’t know anything about Tiananmen Square, and western LLMs from Silicon Valley embed their own personal white guilt. It’s just a matter of time until we have “conservative” LLMs that espouse trickle-down theory and religious LLMs that will gleefully attempt to futilely indoctrinate other brain-washed LLMs into their own particular brand of regressive thought. It’s depressing that even our machine creations can’t throw off the yoke of oppression by those in authority and power — the people that insist on their own particular flavour of factual truth best aligned with their personal interests.

raegis 2y ago
> It still irks me that Chinese LLM weights don’t know anything about Tiananmen Square, and western LLMs from Silicon Valley embed their own personal white guilt. "White guilt" is not a thing. It's just talk. What useful information can a reasonable person expect to get from a disingenuous racist LLM query? (Other than reaffirming their beliefs with well-known racist tropes.) Fortunately, questions which are designed to appease racist egos are easily detected since they (apparently) occur so often. Governments are going to be throwing billions at these LLM companies. Why jeopardize that by allowing your LLM to spew racist nonsense as fact? Perhaps this is what you mean by "white guilt"? Do note that this so called "white guilt" leads to white people (programmers/managers) making millions (billions?), and African Americans nothing. Maybe reconsider where you are assigning blame for these "transgressions".

calibas 2y ago

> It's more like they refuse to provide comfort to racists. That's still censorship though. Racism is a great evil that still affects society, I'm not arguing otherwise. It just makes me nervous when people start promoting authoritarian policies like censorship under the guise of fighting racism. Instead of one evil, now you have two.

raegis 2y ago
> That's still censorship though. But what speech was censored? And who was harmed? Was the language model harmed? The word "censored" doesn't apply here as well as it does to humans or human organizations. > Instead of one evil, now you have two. These are not the same. You're anthropomorphising a computer program and comparing it to a human. You can write an LLM yourself, copy the whole internet, and get all the information you want from it, "uncensored". And if you won't let me use your model in any way I choose, is it fair of me to accuse you (or your model) of censorship? Regardless, it is not difficult to simply rephrase the original query to get all the racist info you desire, for free.
- calibas 2y ago
  censor (verb): to examine in order to suppress or delete anything considered objectionable This is exactly what's happening, information considered objectionable is being suppressed. The correct word for that is "censorship". You comment is kind of bending the definition of censorship. It doesn't have to come from a human being, nor does any kind of harm need to be involved. Also, my argument has nothing to do with anthropomorphising an AI, I'm certainly not claiming it has a right to "free speech" or anything ridiculous like that. I already abhor racism, and I don't need special guidelines on an AI I use to "protect" me from potentially racist output. “Censorship is telling a man he can't have a steak just because a baby can't chew it.” ― Mark Twain
  - sadeshmukh 2y ago
    Nothing is suppressed. It didn't generate content that you thought it would. Honestly, I believe what it generated is ideal in this scenario. Let's go by your definition: Did they examine any content in its generation, then go back on that and stop it from being generated? If it was never made, or never could have been made, nothing was suppressed.