5 ms·
Has any AI company not been caught doing this? Grok is just doing it in the opposite direction. I hate it too, but let's not pretend we don't know what's goin
by fallingknife 1y ago
Has any AI company not been caught doing this? Grok is just doing it in the opposite direction. I hate it too, but let's not pretend we don't know what's going on here.
- kentm 1y agoI think conflating what other companies have been doing with what Grok is doing is disingenuous personally. Most other AI stuff has had banal "brand safety" style guards baked in. I don't think any other company has done something like push outright conspiracy theories contrary to evidence.
- fallingknife 1y ago"brand safety" is just a term for aligning with a particular bias
- tempodox 1y agoEveryone is biased. Pushing conspiracy theories is something else entirely.
- kentm 1y agoNot all biases are equivalent. "Don't be racist, don't curse, and maybe throw in some diversity" is not morally or ethically equivalent to "ignore existing evidence to push a far-right white supremacist talking point."
- bilbo0s 1y agoUh, guy, it's called a bias to make money as opposed to a bias towards not making money. Being in favor of making money with the company you create is not a bad thing. It's a good thing. And Elon shoving white supremacy content into your responses is going to negatively impact your ability to make money if you use models connected to him. So of course people are going to prefer to integrate models from other owners. Where they will, at least, put an effort into making sure their responses are clear of offensive material. It's business.
- altcognito 1y agoThis comment without any context, explanation or proof is just lazy and shows a profound misunderstanding about what bias is.
- HarHarVeryFunny 1y agoActually the first versions of Grok had the same "left leaning" bias as other models since it turns out that bias is in the data that everyone is using to train on), so if Grok is now more right leaning it is because they have deliberately manipulated it to be so. This also begs the question, does it make sense to call something a "bias" when that is the majority view (i.e. reflected in bulk of training data) ?
- JohnMakin 1y agoThe problem is "left leaning" has absolutely no rational definition anymore. Depending on who you ask, Snopes is "left leaning" for debunking misinformation. Facts can be "left leaning" if you don't like them enough.
- bradhe 1y agoReality has a left-leaning bias.
- oceanplexian 1y agoOn kind of a tangent I think it would be interesting to train a model on a certain time frame, or non-web content. Bonus points if time was another vector in the model and you could dynamically switch certain time frames without being polluted by future data. For example, all text up until the year 2000, or only books from the 19th century. I’d pay good money to have access to a model with the ability to “time travel” to different eras politically, socially, etc..
- HarHarVeryFunny 1y agoInteresting concept ... Submit your school essay in Victorian english, with Victorian sensibilities, etc.
- int_19h 1y agoGrok 3 is still very much "left leaning".
- feoren 1y ago> Grok is just doing it in the opposite direction. Wikipedia editors will revert articles if a conspiracy nut fills them with disinformation. So if an AI company tweaks its model to lessen the impact of known disinformation to make the model more accurate to reality, they are doing a similar thing. Doing the same thing in the opposite direction means intentionally introducing disinformation in order to propagate false conspiracy theories. Do you not see the difference? Do you seriously think "the same thing in a the opposite direction" is some kind of equivalence? It's the opposite direction!