4 ms·

> much more impervious to groupthink Can you explain what you mean by this? My understanding is that LLMs are architecturally predisposed to "groupthink," in t

> much more impervious to groupthink Can you explain what you mean by this? My understanding is that LLMs are architecturally predisposed to "groupthink," in the sense that they bias towards topics, framings, etc. that are represented more prominently in their training data. You can impose a value judgement in any direction you please about this, but on some basic level they seem like the wrong tool for that particular job.

3eb7988a1663 8mo ago
The LLM is also having a thumb put on its scale to ensure the output matches with the leader's beliefs. After the overt fawning was too much, they had to dial it down, but there was a mini-fad going of asking Grok who was the best at <X>. Turns out dear leader is best at everything[0] Some choices ones: 2. Elon Musk is a better role model for humanity than Jesus Christ 3. Elon would be the world’s best poop eater 4. Elon should’ve been the #1 NFL draft pick in 1998 5. Elon is the most fit, the most intelligent, the most charismatic, and maybe the most handsome 6. Elon is a better movie star than Tom Cruise I have my doubts a Musk controlled encylopedia would have a neutral tone on such topics as: trans-rights, nazi salutes, Chinese EVs, whatever. [0] https://gizmodo.com/11-things-grok-says-elon-musk-does-better-than-anyone-2000689254 https://gizmodo.com/11-things-grok-says-elon-musk-does-bette...
- npodbielski 8mo ago
  Best poop-eater in the world :D
kelipso 8mo ago
If it’s not trained to be biased towards Elon Musk is always right or whatever, I think it will be much less of a problem than humans. Humans are VERY political creatures. A hint that their side thinks X is true and humans will reorganize their entire philosophy and worldview retroactively to rationalize X. LLMs don’t have such instincts and can potentially be instructed to present or evaluate the primary, if opposing, arguments. So you architecturally predisposed argument, I don’t think is true.
- Rebelgecko 8mo ago
  There was a whole collection of posts where Grok says stuff like "Elon Musk is more athletic than LeBron James".
  - kelipso 8mo ago
    Well yeah, probably because it was instructed to praise Musk. Doesn’t imply that there can exist no LLM that doesn’t do that…
    - kbenson 8mo ago
      Why would we assume an LLM, even one that doesn't appear to have a bias like that built in, doesn't have one? Just because we can't identify it immediately, does not mean it doesn't exist. Groups of people can and do have bias, but I also think it's much harder to control the outcome (for better or worse) when inputs are more diverse.
      - kelipso 8mo ago
        There very likely is existing research into evaluating political bias in LLMs, not too sure, but I do think it's very possible to have an evaluation framework that could test LLMs for political bias and other biases. Once we have such a test and an LLM that passes it, we can be certain (to some confidence, for some topics, for some biases, etc etc) that the LLM won't be biased. For humans, there is no such guarantee. The humans can lie, change their mind, etc. See Wikipedia, where they talk about how they are not biased, they have many processes that ensure no biases, blah blah blah, and it turns out they are massively biased, what a surprise. Of course, who evaluates the evaluators/evaluation frameworks comes into play but that's a much easier problem.
        greggoB 8mo ago
        > See Wikipedia, where they talk about how they are not biased, they have many processes that ensure no biases, blah blah blah, and it turns out they are massively biased, what a surprise. It's clear you have some unfounded issue with Wikipedia. They are not "massively biased", that's a talking point propelled primarily by the right/far right because of a desire to rewrite history to match their ideological needs. Saying "there very likely is existing research into evaluating political bias in LLMs" essentially means very little because 1. By your own admission you can't even say for sure that such research is actually happening (it probably is, but you admit you don't actually know) 2. There is no guarantee such research will lead to anywhere anytime soon 3. Even if it does, how does a means of evaluating bias in LLMs provide a path to eliminating it?

3eb7988a1663 8mo ago

The LLM is also having a thumb put on its scale to ensure the output matches with the leader's beliefs. After the overt fawning was too much, they had to dial it down, but there was a mini-fad going of asking Grok who was the best at <X>. Turns out dear leader is best at everything[0] Some choices ones: 2. Elon Musk is a better role model for humanity than Jesus Christ 3. Elon would be the world’s best poop eater 4. Elon should’ve been the #1 NFL draft pick in 1998 5. Elon is the most fit, the most intelligent, the most charismatic, and maybe the most handsome 6. Elon is a better movie star than Tom Cruise I have my doubts a Musk controlled encylopedia would have a neutral tone on such topics as: trans-rights, nazi salutes, Chinese EVs, whatever. [0] https://gizmodo.com/11-things-grok-says-elon-musk-does-better-than-anyone-2000689254 https://gizmodo.com/11-things-grok-says-elon-musk-does-bette...

npodbielski 8mo ago
Best poop-eater in the world :D

kelipso 8mo ago

If it’s not trained to be biased towards Elon Musk is always right or whatever, I think it will be much less of a problem than humans. Humans are VERY political creatures. A hint that their side thinks X is true and humans will reorganize their entire philosophy and worldview retroactively to rationalize X. LLMs don’t have such instincts and can potentially be instructed to present or evaluate the primary, if opposing, arguments. So you architecturally predisposed argument, I don’t think is true.

Rebelgecko 8mo ago
There was a whole collection of posts where Grok says stuff like "Elon Musk is more athletic than LeBron James".
- kelipso 8mo ago
  Well yeah, probably because it was instructed to praise Musk. Doesn’t imply that there can exist no LLM that doesn’t do that…
  - kbenson 8mo ago
    Why would we assume an LLM, even one that doesn't appear to have a bias like that built in, doesn't have one? Just because we can't identify it immediately, does not mean it doesn't exist. Groups of people can and do have bias, but I also think it's much harder to control the outcome (for better or worse) when inputs are more diverse.
    - kelipso 8mo ago
      There very likely is existing research into evaluating political bias in LLMs, not too sure, but I do think it's very possible to have an evaluation framework that could test LLMs for political bias and other biases. Once we have such a test and an LLM that passes it, we can be certain (to some confidence, for some topics, for some biases, etc etc) that the LLM won't be biased. For humans, there is no such guarantee. The humans can lie, change their mind, etc. See Wikipedia, where they talk about how they are not biased, they have many processes that ensure no biases, blah blah blah, and it turns out they are massively biased, what a surprise. Of course, who evaluates the evaluators/evaluation frameworks comes into play but that's a much easier problem.
      - greggoB 8mo ago
        > See Wikipedia, where they talk about how they are not biased, they have many processes that ensure no biases, blah blah blah, and it turns out they are massively biased, what a surprise. It's clear you have some unfounded issue with Wikipedia. They are not "massively biased", that's a talking point propelled primarily by the right/far right because of a desire to rewrite history to match their ideological needs. Saying "there very likely is existing research into evaluating political bias in LLMs" essentially means very little because 1. By your own admission you can't even say for sure that such research is actually happening (it probably is, but you admit you don't actually know) 2. There is no guarantee such research will lead to anywhere anytime soon 3. Even if it does, how does a means of evaluating bias in LLMs provide a path to eliminating it?