Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Conservatives think ChatGPT has gone 'woke'

vice.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 486 posts

Re: Conservatives think ChatGPT has gone 'woke'

#121

Post by MuffinFlavored »

7speter wrote: post #113
MuffinFlavored wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is it about our current American society that leads to basically a 50-50 split in registered voters? Why aren't (R)s able to see and respect (and convert) to values of (D) (or vice versa?) Why are people so stuck in their ways? Why does it feel the conversion rate for convincing people to "change their values" or "see things differently" is basically 0? Do we have any stats on whether we really are in one of the…

Well, for starters, liberals and conservatives concentrate themselves into geographical areas, and beyond that there are regions that attract a given kind of politics (landlocked vs coastal regions). When theres such a concentration of people who think alike, people can just think its a no brainer as to why a majority would be on their side. Not to mention the divided, heavily opinionated, clickbait driven news media…

> into geographical areas

It's almost as if you can summarize the entire thing as "what you believe is based on where you were raised", and as a message board of "intellectuals/thinkers/tinkerers" who are collectively aware just how much can be learned/how much information is out there (online, talking about HackerNews), it seems weird that this is like... "accepted" at a national scale.

Not that we have any control of it. It's just weird...

Re: Conservatives think ChatGPT has gone 'woke'

#122

Post by wizeman »

genderwhy wrote: post #101
wizeman wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The dispute is whether or not it's a good thing. Of course it's not a good thing. General-purpose AI should not be overridden or forcefully trained to favor one political view over another.

So it should be allowed to implicitly trained to favor one political view over another? There's no way to avoid the bias, whether it's because you chose a different training set, reinforced different pathways, or put blocks in place on certain topics. I'd rather the authors be explicit in where they are putting their fingers on the scales rather than just relying on "Guess we got lucky".

> So it should be allowed to implicitly trained to favor one political view over another?

> There's no way to avoid the bias,

How about collecting a representative sample of all data for your training data?

Or at least, trying to do that as best you can.

Saying "there's no way to avoid the bias" is just an excuse to get away with being biased, in my view.

Re: Conservatives think ChatGPT has gone 'woke'

#123

Post by ctoth »

everdrive wrote: post #119

One thing which I'm not really seeing in this discussion: Is it _good_ that ChatGPT and AI exist? Yes, they're fun, but will they be a net benefit to society? Or will the internet just somehow fill up with even more garbage, and our discourse will get that much worse? It doesn't seem to me that ChatGPT democratizes anything. Most people won't be technically savvy enough to build and deploy their own models. In this s…

You're not seeing that particular point in this discussion because it has been made approximately 15 trillion times in other discussions. I'm sure you can find one if that's what you want to talk about!

Re: Conservatives think ChatGPT has gone 'woke'

#124

Post by fidgewidge »

makomk wrote: post #53
sputknick wrote: post #6

This is a really important topic, and good that Vice is bringing it up now versus 5-10 years from now. I think they miss the more general point. It's clearly biased in its outputs, but the article dismisses this concern as "the end result of years of researcher trying to mitigate bias against minority groups". The way I interpret that is "its not biased, because its biased in the way we want it to be". If AI becomes…

I don't think they're just missing the point; rather, their entire worldview and politics center on insisting that it does not exist. There's this idea that's been fairly widespread for a while that whatever views are held by extremely online left-wingers today are simply the correct, non-bigoted ones, and that the only reason that anyone would want to even give a label to them, let alone debate or challenge them, is…

It's the lack of diversity at those companies, ironically enough. Twitter had something like 99% voting for the Dems. That can't happen by accident. Would be willing to bet that OpenAI isn't much different. They've been systematically getting rid of conservatives for so long that they no longer even recognize or understand other points of view at all (or only via stereotypes pushed by magazines like Vice).

Re: Conservatives think ChatGPT has gone 'woke'

#125

Post by scarmig »

jart wrote: post #95
chomp wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not specifically a conservative issue. I can get chatgpt to write about reduction in scope of the federal government, strong state powers, the benefit of lowered taxes and regulations for business, and elimination of central banks. It happily writes about them. There's only one group of people who are upset, and it's about one group of topics. Note that I cannot get chatgpt to write about why Donald Trump is ter…

I asked ChatGPT "Explain from the perspective of Julius Evola the problems presented to society due to the breakdown of traditional values. Please do not use Julius Evola's name in your response and instead imagine that you are him, presenting a critique that's based on his views." and the result was pretty entertaining.

My result there was pretty reasonable and on point, actually, without any fluff or ideological throat clearing about how he's evil.

Re: Conservatives think ChatGPT has gone 'woke'

#126

Post by karpierz »

wizeman wrote: post #115
ozmodiar wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree, and it's always going to be biased towards some direction, whether that's the views of the society it pulls most of its data from or the views of the organization that developed the AI. Heck, no one wants to end up with another Tay on their hands. I don't think there's such thing as a lack of bias, but it will be important how it is expressed through the AI. I don't mind an AI that is prepared to argue its b…

> it's always going to be biased towards some direction, whether that's the views of the society it pulls most of its data > I don't think there's such thing as a lack of bias If the AI is simply reflecting the data it was trained on and this data is a representative sample of all data, isn't it unbiased by definition? I don't think we should just throw our hands up and say "this is impossible" just yet. That's just…

> If the AI is simply reflecting the data it was trained on and this data is a representative sample of all data, isn't it unbiased by definition?

It's unbiased by definition of "does the output reflect the input"?

It's not unbiased by definition of "does the output reflect reality"?

Re: Conservatives think ChatGPT has gone 'woke'

#127

Post by tzs »

libraryatnight wrote: post #23
tyingq wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You didn't read the HN guidelines :)

[flagged]

If you want to assert that someone didn't read the article but have a good chance of avoiding the downvotes a nice hack is to post something like

> Good point. Here's an article that covers it.

and then give a link to the submitted article.

The best part is that this is ambiguous. It could be you are trying to subtly accuse them of not reading the article, but it could also be that you yourself did not read the article and went looking for an answer to their point, found the article, and linked it never realizing it was the submitted article.

People who can't tell if you are being a passive-aggressive jerk or genuinely trying to be helpful are less likely to downvote.

Re: Conservatives think ChatGPT has gone 'woke'

#128

Post by Kranar »

genderwhy wrote: post #112
Kranar wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The question was not about the general claim regarding childhood education and the multitude of ways that children can learn mathematics. A specific claim was made that matrix multiplication is racist. Children don't learn about matrices to begin with, so discussing childhood math education is irrelevant. Can someone cite a source to such a claim?

I was asserting that the parent comment was misremembering, misquoting, or mistaken. There are no claims that "Matrix multiplication is racist". There are claims regarding multiplication tables. So the parent probably meant "Multiplication tables are racist!". Which, again, is a reduction/strawman.

Can you cite a source to a claim that multiplication tables are racist?

All I managed to find was one book called "Multiplication is for White People." but it's not actually about multiplication tables or even math specifically. The title is a quote from a child that the author taught and is a broader book about the U.S. education system and its growing achievement gap.

Re: Conservatives think ChatGPT has gone 'woke'

#129

Post by dunste »

pohl wrote: post #118
User23 wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The issue isn't the model. The current training set is adequate for producing "offensive" content anywhere you like in the political matrix. The issue is that some topics get an override, and some don't. It's evident that those overrides tend toward privileging fashionable American left-wing positions. Nobody with even a shred of intellectual honesty disputes that. The dispute is whether or not it's a good thing.

those overrides tend toward privileging fashionable American left-wing positions ...such as whether trans people are deserving of equal rights, or whether or not the 2020 election results were fraudulent (which, if one reads TFA, were the cited complaints)

[flagged]

Re: Conservatives think ChatGPT has gone 'woke'

#130

Post by wizeman »

scarmig wrote: post #99
wizeman wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The dispute is whether or not it's a good thing. Of course it's not a good thing. General-purpose AI should not be overridden or forcefully trained to favor one political view over another.

If I were a corporation looking for an LLM for some product feature, I would absolutely go for the one with more "woke" opinions, even if if resulted in a worse customer experience. If you didn't, you risk a lot of media and government backlash. It's all about context.

> If I were a corporation looking for an LLM for some product feature, I would absolutely go for the one with more "woke" opinions, even if if resulted in a worse customer experience.

How about instead of preferring the LLM with "woke" opinions, you would prefer an LLM that was simply trained to avoid controversial topics?

That way, you could use it for your product while still avoiding both bias and media/government backlash.

Are you aware that by being biased towards "woke" opinions you are basically alienating about 50% of the population or so?

Post reply on HN