• rainrain@sh.itjust.worksBanned from communityOP
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    3 days ago

    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.

    • irmoz@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      3 days ago

      So, once again, you double down. No, you obviously didn’t know that, and clearly still don’t actually understand it, since you’re claiming it was engineered to push a narrative (what narrative you won’t say, but i bet it rhymes with bliss gandry).

      Lastly, it’s not an “excuse”. It’s an explanation. Calling it an “excuse” is just another attempt to deflect the answer and avoid being wrong.

      • rainrain@sh.itjust.worksBanned from communityOP
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        3 days ago

        Well given that the bias is generally considered a bad thing, explanations absolving them of responsibility for the badness are what is generally called an “excuse”.

        • irmoz@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          3 days ago

          It’s not absolving them of responsibility. They’re responsible for how they train their data - it doesn’t need to be trained on social media.