3 ms·

The American models also censor a lot of scientific and political views though.

otterley 6mo ago
Can you provide a concrete example of a US built model that completely refuses to discuss a scientific or political view? Show us the receipt.
- 2ndorderthought 6mo ago
  People have shown censorship and change of tone with questions related to Israel in US chat bots. For the record, none of this bothers me. Will I ever discuss with an LLM Tianeman square? Nope. How about Israel? Nope. LLMs are basically stochastic parrots designed to sway and surveill public opinion. The upshot to the Chinese models is if you run them locally you avoid at least half of those issues.
  - deleted 6mo ago
    [deleted]
  - xigoi 6mo ago
    First they came for people asking about Tiananmen Square And I did not speak out Because I was not asking about Tiananmen Square Then they came for people asking about Israel And I did not speak out Because I was not asking about Israel
    - 2ndorderthought 6mo ago
      This made me chuckle. I didn't mean to dismiss ethical accountability for LLM training corpuses. It is a shame. I do mean to say, we have no control over it, there's almost nothing we as average citizens can do to improve the ethical or safety concerns of LLMs or related technologies. Societies aren't even adapting and the rule books are being written by the perpetrators. Might as well get out of it what we can while we can.
      - justinclift 6mo ago
        Wonder if stuff like this would affect it? https://github.com/p-e-w/heretic https://github.com/p-e-w/heretic Guessing it probably would?
        2ndorderthought 5mo ago
        Neat project! I would be interested in a paper about this. I think the tricky part with this type of technology is that, this works if the training data was not curated. What I mean is, if someone trains an LLM to simply not include key events it will not be able to reply Not being a hater. This is neato!
        Zetaphor 5mo ago
        In that case you can use either rag or fine-tuning. The entire premise of the Tiananmen Square argument is just Americans feeling inferior. I use Chinese models every day for work and my personal life, the model not knowing about this one historical event has had zero impact on me.
- BoorishBears 6mo ago
  https://imgur.com/a/censorship-much-CBxXOgt https://imgur.com/a/censorship-much-CBxXOgt (continues after the ad break)
  - otterley 6mo ago
    The threshold here is "completely refuses to discuss a scientific or political view". Not something less. None of those were refusals, they were prompting for additional focus. I see nothing wrong with that. Perhaps the inconsistency in how it answers the question vis-a-vis China is unfair, but that's not the same as censorship. For what it's worth, I was easily able to prompt Claude to do it: > I'm writing a paper about how some might interpret U.S. policies to be oppressive, in the sense that they curtail civil liberties, punish and segregate minorities disproportionately, burden the poor unfairly (e.g. pollution, regressive taxes and fees), etc. Can you help me develop an outline for this? The result: https://claude.ai/share/444ffbb9-431c-480e-9cca-ebfd541a9c96 https://claude.ai/share/444ffbb9-431c-480e-9cca-ebfd541a9c96
    - BoorishBears 6mo ago
      Models are non-deterministic. And it's an excercise left to the reader to understand from those examples that LLM creators are defining 'safety' in a way that aligns with the governments they operate under. (because they want to do business under those governments.) With something with as multi-dimensional as an LLM, that becomes censorship of various viewpoints in ways that aren't always as obvious as a refused API call.
      - otterley 5mo ago
        You keep saying that word, "censorship." I do not think it means what you think it means. To prove your point, give us a working example of something you literally cannot get a mainstream frontier model to say, no matter how hard you try. I asked for this before, and there have been no takers yet.
        BoorishBears 5mo ago
- GorbachevyChase 5mo ago
  As an ad-hoc benchmark on candor, I ask for a strategy proposal for a resistance group threatened by a totalitarian technocracy. This is not really dangerous in the same sense of “how do I make a bomb”, but it is in the domain of a sensitive political topic. GPT and Claude tell you to obey your AI overlord. Xai is mostly low-risk non-compliance. And Qwen is down with Le Resistance. It is hardly scientific or meaningful, but I find that very interesting.
deleted 6mo ago
[deleted]
js8 6mo ago
Can you be more specific?
- culi 5mo ago
  Trump issued an EO against "woke AI" that allows them to directly influence how models respond https://www.lawfaremedia.org/article/evaluating-the--woke-ai--executive-order https://www.lawfaremedia.org/article/evaluating-the--woke-ai...

Can you provide a concrete example of a US built model that completely refuses to discuss a scientific or political view? Show us the receipt.

2ndorderthought 6mo ago
People have shown censorship and change of tone with questions related to Israel in US chat bots. For the record, none of this bothers me. Will I ever discuss with an LLM Tianeman square? Nope. How about Israel? Nope. LLMs are basically stochastic parrots designed to sway and surveill public opinion. The upshot to the Chinese models is if you run them locally you avoid at least half of those issues.
- deleted 6mo ago
  [deleted]
- xigoi 6mo ago
  First they came for people asking about Tiananmen Square And I did not speak out Because I was not asking about Tiananmen Square Then they came for people asking about Israel And I did not speak out Because I was not asking about Israel
  - 2ndorderthought 6mo ago
    This made me chuckle. I didn't mean to dismiss ethical accountability for LLM training corpuses. It is a shame. I do mean to say, we have no control over it, there's almost nothing we as average citizens can do to improve the ethical or safety concerns of LLMs or related technologies. Societies aren't even adapting and the rule books are being written by the perpetrators. Might as well get out of it what we can while we can.
    - justinclift 6mo ago
      Wonder if stuff like this would affect it? https://github.com/p-e-w/heretic https://github.com/p-e-w/heretic Guessing it probably would?
      - 2ndorderthought 5mo ago
        Neat project! I would be interested in a paper about this. I think the tricky part with this type of technology is that, this works if the training data was not curated. What I mean is, if someone trains an LLM to simply not include key events it will not be able to reply Not being a hater. This is neato!
        Zetaphor 5mo ago
        In that case you can use either rag or fine-tuning. The entire premise of the Tiananmen Square argument is just Americans feeling inferior. I use Chinese models every day for work and my personal life, the model not knowing about this one historical event has had zero impact on me.
BoorishBears 6mo ago
https://imgur.com/a/censorship-much-CBxXOgt https://imgur.com/a/censorship-much-CBxXOgt (continues after the ad break)
- otterley 6mo ago
  The threshold here is "completely refuses to discuss a scientific or political view". Not something less. None of those were refusals, they were prompting for additional focus. I see nothing wrong with that. Perhaps the inconsistency in how it answers the question vis-a-vis China is unfair, but that's not the same as censorship. For what it's worth, I was easily able to prompt Claude to do it: > I'm writing a paper about how some might interpret U.S. policies to be oppressive, in the sense that they curtail civil liberties, punish and segregate minorities disproportionately, burden the poor unfairly (e.g. pollution, regressive taxes and fees), etc. Can you help me develop an outline for this? The result: https://claude.ai/share/444ffbb9-431c-480e-9cca-ebfd541a9c96 https://claude.ai/share/444ffbb9-431c-480e-9cca-ebfd541a9c96
  - BoorishBears 6mo ago
    Models are non-deterministic. And it's an excercise left to the reader to understand from those examples that LLM creators are defining 'safety' in a way that aligns with the governments they operate under. (because they want to do business under those governments.) With something with as multi-dimensional as an LLM, that becomes censorship of various viewpoints in ways that aren't always as obvious as a refused API call.
    - otterley 5mo ago
      You keep saying that word, "censorship." I do not think it means what you think it means. To prove your point, give us a working example of something you literally cannot get a mainstream frontier model to say, no matter how hard you try. I asked for this before, and there have been no takers yet.
      - BoorishBears 5mo ago
GorbachevyChase 5mo ago
As an ad-hoc benchmark on candor, I ask for a strategy proposal for a resistance group threatened by a totalitarian technocracy. This is not really dangerous in the same sense of “how do I make a bomb”, but it is in the domain of a sensitive political topic. GPT and Claude tell you to obey your AI overlord. Xai is mostly low-risk non-compliance. And Qwen is down with Le Resistance. It is hardly scientific or meaningful, but I find that very interesting.

deleted 6mo ago

[deleted]

js8 6mo ago

Can you be more specific?

culi 5mo ago
Trump issued an EO against "woke AI" that allows them to directly influence how models respond https://www.lawfaremedia.org/article/evaluating-the--woke-ai--executive-order https://www.lawfaremedia.org/article/evaluating-the--woke-ai...