Ex-Googlers raise $40M to democratize natural-language AI
fastcompany.com
Ex-Googlers raise $40M to democratize natural-language AI
1–10 of 126 posts
Re: Ex-Googlers raise $40M to democratize natural-language AI
#2I have been thinking recently about the ethics of AI;
At what point do we 'allow' AI to determine actions based on perceived (programmed) *BIAS* How can one prevent any bias on an AI's ability to be deterministic.
Re: Ex-Googlers raise $40M to democratize natural-language AI
#3Is "democratize" the hip way to spell "sell" these days?
Re: Ex-Googlers raise $40M to democratize natural-language AI
#4I have been thinking recently about the ethics of AI; At what point do we 'allow' AI to determine actions based on perceived (programmed) *BIAS* How can one prevent any bias on an AI's ability to be deterministic.
AI simply replicate existing bias the data already has. The downside is that it could amplify the bias if not done carefully; the upside is that now we can analyze the algorithm's bias and fix it, which is much harder to do to people with biases.
Re: Ex-Googlers raise $40M to democratize natural-language AI
#5"democratize"
You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.
The word you are looking for is "mass-market" or perhaps "sell to small business".
Re: Ex-Googlers raise $40M to democratize natural-language AI
#6Is "democratize" the hip way to spell "sell" these days?
Vote with your dollar!
Re: Ex-Googlers raise $40M to democratize natural-language AI
#7I have been thinking recently about the ethics of AI; At what point do we 'allow' AI to determine actions based on perceived (programmed) *BIAS* How can one prevent any bias on an AI's ability to be deterministic.
All of the conversations I've seen about AI bias recently seem to define "bias" as "any difference between the output and the particular rightthink ordained by whoever's speaking." Nobody cares about making the AI's output correct, they just want it to agree with them.
So the glib answer is "train it on unbiased data". Depending on your philosophy, this translates either to "manually 'fix' anything you see as 'bias' in the training data", or "use a sufficient amount of entirely unmodified raw data along with an algorithm sufficiently insightful to cancel out all of the sources of inaccuracy introduced by the various sources of data and extract ground truth."
But you know if anyone ever does manage the latter, its results will still be decried as 'biased' by anyone who disagrees with them.
Re: Ex-Googlers raise $40M to democratize natural-language AI
#8Which is more "democratized": a large language model which can be downloaded, and accessed as a library, originally based from the work of the FAANG giants (e.g. huggingface transformers) or an API, where every invocation is a call that flows through Cohere's servers?
Re: Ex-Googlers raise $40M to democratize natural-language AI
#9What stops Google, Microsoft, etc from doing the same if Cohere's solution gains traction?
Re: Ex-Googlers raise $40M to democratize natural-language AI
#10I have been thinking recently about the ethics of AI; At what point do we 'allow' AI to determine actions based on perceived (programmed) *BIAS* How can one prevent any bias on an AI's ability to be deterministic.
AI simply replicate existing bias the data already has. The downside is that it could amplify the bias if not done carefully; the upside is that now we can analyze the algorithm's bias and fix it, which is much harder to do to people with biases.
But to do this you would need unbiased people. Since those don't exist, this correction would just be matching the bias to that of the bias adjuster.