You must log in or register to comment.
Unlocking because I don’t want to stifle legitimate discussion
I don’t know what to make of this post.
They inherit the biases of society (unfortunately).
They are also seeded with a bit of randomness for variety in responses. See this (YT Short)
Ask the same exact question and you’ll get a variety of answers.
Edit: I’m beginning to think no more good discussion can come from this.
Man I just don’t get this guy.
Don’t know what to make of this post?
Sounds more like you have very definite ideas about it. And are offering excuses on google’s behalf.
Why would I, a Lemmy user, be defending google? Is that the most likely scenario here? Or is it that I just think all of these models are flawed in a similar way? The linked short was about ChatGPT.
Edit:
Maybe try posting this to [email protected] ?
Tell me you don’t understand “AI” in LLMs without telling me you don’t understand AI in LLMs.
Yes, lunge for that low-hanging fruit, moleman.
And when you’re done, consider the ramifications. Discuss.
😂 Yep, lack of critical thinking detected, initial moron alert confirmed!
This person seems pathologically opposed to admitting they either don’t know something or are wrong.
Well, yeah. It’s an LLM built on a lot of scraping social media.
Now that’s an interesting idea.
We ask questions. Get answers by scraping social media… The answers inform social media. Informing further answers to questions. Etc. A spinning wheel.
It’s deeply incestuous. In a hundred generations what monsters may spawn?
Its not “an interesting idea”, it’s exactly how they work.
Ideas about how things work can be interesting too.
Its not an “idea about how it works”. It is how it works.
Can you not just admit you learned something here? Or do you just have to argue with everything to try and appear right?
What’s wrong with, “oh, I didn’t know that. How interesting!”
I think it was the part about how the training data gets poisoned that was the interesting idea.
It is also the reality we’re living in however.
Based on their behaviour, I’m not so sure. It seemed to me to be a way of saying “that’s maybe not true, but it’s fun to think about”. At least, that’s how I’d use the phrase “that’s an interesting idea”. If I just found it interesting, I’d say “how interesting!”
But yes, it is indeed fascinating how LLMs work.
are you a robot?
Let’s rewind to before that desperate (and likely spontaneous) accusation, and I’ll give you another chance to reply in a normal manner.
No deflection. Just admit you didn’t know LLMs scrape social media. That’s all. It’s okay; we don’t come into this world with all of its knowledge.
I actually did have a vague idea in that general direction.
But that’s rather beside my point. I mean, the AI definitely offered these answers. The answers are definitely gender biased. Offering that it’s merely an artifact of the LLM technology is definitely a terrible excuse for that.
And given that LLMs are well known to be tweaked to align better with the philosophical styles of the hour, doubly so.
That’s how people use those words. A woman is described as “pushy” for being assertive. It’s a commonly known problem.
