3 ms·
1. Google didn't claim it was some rogue employee. It was a flaw in their model weights (they'd had others before). 2. Apple's case is more similar, but their
by insane_dreamer 1y ago
1. Google didn't claim it was some rogue employee. It was a flaw in their model weights (they'd had others before).
2. Apple's case is more similar, but their dictation feature is not a core product in the way that xAI's chat bot is. In other words, you'd expect more checks to ensure that something like your system prompt can't just be modified by some employee (on purpose or inadvertently).
- FirmwareBurner 1y ago>It was a flaw in their model weights (they'd had others before). Why does that flaw only have a bias against white people? It's not like it's an accident that nobody inside Google noticed before release. That prompt bias was put there by employees at Google. Think of it the other way, if Gemini had a bias against non-white demographics, would you still brush it off as just a flaw, or as a form of bias/discrimination of employees at Google who code, test and approve this stuff? Remember when Google's image recognition mistakenly took a photo of two black people and labeled as monkeys? They had hell to pay for that mistake yet if it refuses to acknowledge white people then it's just a innocent whoopsie.
- insane_dreamer 1y agoYou're conflating two different problems: - AI companies not training their algorithms on sufficiently diverse data, not tuning their algorithms sufficiently to penalize bias, and not testing it sufficiently to ensure the responses are not biases. - Someone at an AI company deliberately modifying the system prompt in order to encourage responses of a given type. Not saying the latter is worse than the former, but they're completely different problems. The xAI problem, in the case, was the latter.
- FirmwareBurner 1y ago[flagged]
- insane_dreamer 1y agoDude, believe whatever you want. IDGAF.