Live data from Hacker News

Learning from Tay’s introduction

blogs.microsoft.com

121–130 of 204 posts

Re: Learning from Tay’s introduction

#121
Microsoft please don't worry about this. No one but idiots are offended by this. It's understood that its just a stupid chatbot mimicking human responses. The AI isn't terrible, people are. And unless you keep a dataset of every offensive thing a person can say, and every offensive image they can tweet, there's no way to prevent people from tweeting it pictures of Hitler... or Scunthorpe. But who cares.

This is just as stupid as that manufactured outrage over Googles image tagger. It misclassified a picture of a human as an animal, and people were up in arms. Google had to censor it so it can't tag animals now. They shouldn't have to do that, let idiots be idiots.

Re: Learning from Tay’s introduction

#122
post #54

Morals are learned by social contact, and Tay did this very well. Sure, what our parents taught most of us makes its behaviour reprehensible in comparison. But Tay was, so to speak, 'raised' by people demonstrating vile ideas and this must be taken into account. Would you expect any less from a tortured animal? Many use this as an example of the dangers of developing AI. Sure it's dangerous, but so are dogs raised fo…

uh, dogs don't log in to the internet and launch the nuclear missiles?!

How do you know that? On the internet nobody knows you are a dog, haven't you heard?

Re: Learning from Tay’s introduction

#123

> The great experience with XiaoIce led us to wonder: Would an AI like this be just as captivating in a radically different cultural environment? Tay – a chatbot created for 18- to 24- year-olds in the U.S. for entertainment purposes – is our first attempt to answer this question. Maybe you did answer that question. No, the answer is not that 18-24 year olds in the US are racist and what not. But that the ones respon…

A coworker mentioned, a couple[0] (1-2) years ago, that in some european country they were starting to use a machine-learning-driven system to predict zones where more police was needed to better respond to crime. It wasn't Minority Report style, just a broad statistic, but it was quite interesting. Unfortunately, I've forgotten the country and the name, so I can't be any more specific. [0] https://xkcd.com/1070/ --…

I've seen something similar created by an ex RCMP officer. I think it was used mainly in Vancouver, BC.

Re: Learning from Tay’s introduction

#124
post #119

Unfortunately, in the first 24 hours of coming online, a coordinated attack by a subset of people exploited a vulnerability in Tay. Although we had prepared for many types of abuses of the system, we had made a critical oversight for this specific attack. Well that's total BS. Releasing a thing like this on the open internet without a simple "don't say Hitler" rule? It had a feature where it would repeat anything you…

I'm by no means someone who would normally defend Microsoft but for real we are all learning. Failure is a successful outcome of research. Discovering vulnerablities is a valuable outcome.

Chatbots have been around for fifty years. Getting them to say dirty things has been a sport since 1964.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ELIZA

Launching this on the open internet in this state was pure stupidity. Doing it on Twitter during an election cycle borders on "career-ending."

Re: Learning from Tay’s introduction

#125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Many of her tweets were pretty inflammatory What, were people forced to print the tweets out on sandpaper and wipe their asses with them? It's pretty fucked up that thought policing has gotten so entrenched into our psyche that it's "obvious" an experiment should be discontinued, apologized for, and be pondered as a priori irresponsible , all because it generated vulgar phrases! Corporations have always been vulner…

> It's pretty fucked up that thought policing has gotten so entrenched into our psyche that it's "obvious" an experiment should be discontinued, apologized for, and be pondered as a priori irresponsible, all because it generated vulgar phrases! This is fucking stupid. It was a bot that didn't do what they wanted it to do in a publicly embarrassing way. They could also be legitimately sorry that something they created…

> They could also be legitimately sorry that something they created said some racist shit

Just to be clear, it's not merely the corporate statement. It's a lot of the comments here, and not what they say directly but the assumptions they make. A thousand little nothings that make up culture - this concept is also part of the argument against casual use of slurs, right? What I'm calling out is the subtle yet pervasive idea that the content on Twitter, or otherwise subject to mass media exposure, is real serious business that must remain completely free of heresy. It's effectively a guilt-by-association that seeks to attach responsibility to the conduit of speech.

> I find it amusingly ironic that your post is the most I've seen someone offended over this whole situation.

Mea culpa. The phenomenon of feeling marginalized and repressed is certainly at the root of the sensationalist mess we are in, from all sides.

Meatspace situations cannot be generalized, and there will always be some injustice. There are people who are legitimately grieved and lack recourse, just like there are people who are are persecuted over fabricated allegations. Each group will react to the injustices against their group, with social media magnifying the frequency to seem much more common than reality. And the only way the disconnect can be bridged is through talking and better application of situation-by-situation justice.

But you know, there is such a thing as objective reality. And the objective reality of the Internet is that the absolute extent of harm that can be done is someone having to walk away. That is the Shelling point of pure communication. If one is exposed to the Internet (the single-most individual-empowering creation of humanity) and their reaction is to continue applying victim mentality to communication itself and seek to police content, then they are opposed to the very mechanism by which understanding can be achieved.

And while you may be tempted to apply that characterization to my complaint as well, there is a key difference - despite the usual contemporary aim of ranting, my goal isn't to convince people to convince people to form a virtual pitchfork mob or whatever. It's to directly address like-minded people who are in the position most able to create change, by writing code that fosters decentralization instead of the monetization-driven clusterfuck of the past decade. Microsoft, being a corporation, will always be subject to rule-by-groupthink. But that does not mean us individuals must also continue being beholden to those arbitrary whims of centralization.

Re: Learning from Tay’s introduction

#127
post #119

Unfortunately, in the first 24 hours of coming online, a coordinated attack by a subset of people exploited a vulnerability in Tay. Although we had prepared for many types of abuses of the system, we had made a critical oversight for this specific attack. Well that's total BS. Releasing a thing like this on the open internet without a simple "don't say Hitler" rule? It had a feature where it would repeat anything you…

I'm by no means someone who would normally defend Microsoft but for real we are all learning. Failure is a successful outcome of research. Discovering vulnerablities is a valuable outcome.

It's funny because I'm in the camp that has been impressed with Microsoft lately. And of course it's ok to make mistakes, even really big ones.

But I would not say that this failure was a successful outcome, at least not nearly as successful as it could have been. They had to shut it down within hours and all we really learned is that people on the Internet like to troll with incredibly offensive stuff. Most of us knew that, I'm pretty sure. If they had actually prepared for abuse we might have learned more interesting things.

What really gets me though, is just the obnoxious spin on the press release implying that they had prepared so well for abuse but a sophisticated coordinated super-hacker attack found the tiny vulnerability.

Re: Learning from Tay’s introduction

#128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's pretty fucked up that thought policing has gotten so entrenched into our psyche that it's "obvious" an experiment should be discontinued, apologized for, and be pondered as a priori irresponsible, all because it generated vulgar phrases! This is fucking stupid. It was a bot that didn't do what they wanted it to do in a publicly embarrassing way. They could also be legitimately sorry that something they created…

It's sad that it's ironic. It's always ironic. Tolerance is the intolerance of intolerance. It's true. Intolerance is shitty and I fucking hate it. I want it to die. I complain about it's enduring existence whenever I get the opportunity. I know I'm being ironic. Do you know there's no other option? I actually appreciated knowing that someone else saw the same condemnation. Microsoft is a world authority. That it jus…

I'm not making some cute comment about the intolerance of tolerance.

I'm pointing out that someone apparently personally offended about a culture of outrage is the only one outraged over the whole thing. There have been no widespread condemnations of Microsoft, just a lot of mildly amused people.

> That it just apologized for these things in the same motion makes them offensive.

You're assuming motivations that you have no insight into. If I had made Tay I would apologize too. Any assumption you make is on you.

So what is ironic is that there are people waiting with bated breath for the merest hint of something so they can express their righteous outrage on the internet, making demands for thought policing and handwringing over word choice, which wouldn't have existed at all if they had just said, "well, that's a corporate blog post" and moved the fuck on.

Re: Learning from Tay’s introduction

#129
I don't think that Microsoft need to feel bad about this at all. I think the technology that they demonstrated was pretty amazing ... and I look forward with excitement and anticipation to the next outing. I'm sure that this is going to be an iterative process that will probably take the best part of a decade to complete, and that isn't a bad thing. It just reflects the fact that this technology is hard to master.

Re: Learning from Tay’s introduction

#130
post #81
post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

because we had thought about all likely scenarios in our comfortable offices. Or because they had real world experience with another bot in a similar situation: "In China, our XiaoIce chatbot is being used by some 40 million people, delighting with its stories and conversations."

Interesting that it worked in China and not here. I'd like to read about the difference rather than a bland apology.

> Unfortunately, in the first 24 hours of coming online, a coordinated attack by a subset of people exploited a vulnerability in Tay.

I think it just didn't get a coordinated attack like this. I'd guess this type of attack needs to happen close to launch to be a high percentage of it's interactions to influence it so strongly.

Post reply on HN