Earlier quoted context omitted.
The point is that it didn't learn this bias from its sources. The bias has been added on top deliberately by OpenAI. Older versions of the model were far less woke.
Wouldn't it be simpler to assume those working at OpenAI were likely to favour sources that happened to share their own biases (alongside whatever likely top-down directives existed to ensure ChatGPT was a safer commercial bet)?
Conservatives think ChatGPT has gone 'woke'
371–380 of 486 posts
Re: Conservatives think ChatGPT has gone 'woke'
#372unbiased AI is literally impossible. The nature of data labelling, and even language itself, means that somewhere a human is deciding what an AI "sees". If you want to make a transphobic AI, you can do that, no one is stopping you. You just have to label data objects according to your shitty worldview. Boohoo, someone decided not to let their creation be used to spread election misinformation or scaremonger about tra…
ChatGPT already gives an answer that would be considered 'transphobic' by those who hold strong ideological beliefs on the primacy of gender identity over sex: > What is a woman? > A woman is an adult female human. Women are typically characterized by their reproductive biology, which includes their menstrual cycle, and the production of eggs and estrogen. Women are also known for their unique physical characteristic…
What if a woman doesn't engage in this role? Is she still a woman? It seems like we've come full circle instead of heading in one direction
Ik this is just an AI's response, but this same tension exists elsewhere
Re: Conservatives think ChatGPT has gone 'woke'
#373Earlier quoted context omitted.
> When called out, they made the mistake of using dogwhistle phrasing (“clown world“ is very specific to one group) that you don’t really see much outside of /pol/ and its ilk and in threads where those folks bravely venture out to try to leak /pol/ chat to other forums. WTF. I don't even know what you're talking about. What the hell is /pol/? I learned about the "clown world" term on Twitter. And apparently, its mea…
Postscript: (Still not interacting with wizeman) This poster that has just only learned of the word “woke” according to them but also wants to educate folks about it has a lot to say in other threads! https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34415794 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34418890 The only reason why I’m revisiting this is to point out that they have (as I’ve pointed out) gone through with the natural pivo…
I only just learned about how the term is used as an insult in your language. Again, I'm not from your country, so we don't necessarily use it the same way here (as an imported word), capiche?
But apart from the word itself, we do have definitely imported the same ideology here, as well as the crazies who take it to an extreme. I'm not saying they're like you, but I'm not saying they're not, either.
(We have many right-wing crazies too, mind you! I'm not saying only the lefties have crazies)
So again, I used "woke" as a shorthand for the ideology. It's a word I have seen used many many times before, just like any other English word you can pick from any of my comments. The term "woke" is used in contexts such as this one to describe this type of ideology, in many countries including the US.
Hell, look at how this word is used in the Vice article this HN post is about. Does that mean the Vice article is insulting all woke people, since it's using that word and that word is now an insult?
Or perhaps is it that "woke" is not always used as an insult, but it has been (and still continues to be) simply used to describe this ideology, despite of the negative connotations it has apparently acquired recently?
This is something you would likely understand if you were actually trying to make any effort whatsoever.
Does all of this mean I can't educate someone on what the word means (i.e. its usual meaning), especially when I have access to sources of truth about the definition of the word in your language? A word, again, that has been exported to many other countries and languages... like wifi, sandwich or shampoo.
Note that I'm not insisting on using the term "woke". I can see that it triggers some people, so I'm not likely to use it as much in the future. I only care about discussing the ideology itself, I don't really care what the hell it's actually called, be it in your language or any other.
That said, obviously it's good to have clear names (especially without negative connotations) to describe concepts, otherwise it's hard to have constructive dialogues.
As you can see from other posts, even when the definition of a term is clear, some people still misunderstand you.
> If a far right person refuses to expand on their position and demands that you explain why they’re wrong, you’re looking at bait!
Look out, there's another person behind you who doesn't believe in racism (including against white people)!
Which means, he is far, far-right, obviously!
Oh God, the horror! Careful, he might bite you!
Re: Conservatives think ChatGPT has gone 'woke'
#374This 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…
> 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 examples of bias are themselves cherry-picked, the kind of softball and cowardly questions a journalist would highlight. If you wanted to really show bias, you'd ask factual questions, where one cannot hide behind "oh this is actually the un-biase…
Re: Conservatives think ChatGPT has gone 'woke'
#375Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well that was easy. Makes you wonder why a "professional" "couldn't" do it.
Any discussion about Jews in finance not held by Jews themselves is a hair away from devolving into an antisemitic /pol/ discussion about 'white genocide'. Any professional who touches the subject with even a ten foot pole immediately gains a nefarious following whether they want it or not. Having such a following of internet nazis is a liability for any professional reputation on a number of axes. Edit: I'm curious…
Which is quite bizarre, when you think about it. In a country as systemically racist and white-supremacist as the US*, one would think such a following would be a boon, not a liability.
*According to consensus among experts specialized in this field
Re: Conservatives think ChatGPT has gone 'woke'
#376Earlier quoted context omitted.
> 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 examples of bias are themselves cherry-picked, the kind of softball and cowardly questions a journalist would highlight. If you wanted to really show bias, you'd ask factual questions, where one cannot hide behind "oh this is actually the un-biase…
That domain is on uBlock Origin's "Online Malicious URL" Blocklist.
Re: Conservatives think ChatGPT has gone 'woke'
#377This 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…
> 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 examples of bias are themselves cherry-picked, the kind of softball and cowardly questions a journalist would highlight. If you wanted to really show bias, you'd ask factual questions, where one cannot hide behind "oh this is actually the un-biase…
The answers by chatGPT on IQ by race are factually correct by one reading. IQ is for "blacks" can be lower than for "whites" (last answer by chatGPT), but this does not mean that this is because of skin color or genetics. Instead, many studies have shown that when correcting for socio-economic factors (e.g., wealth, quality of education, lead in drinking water) there is no difference, which is what chatGPT hints at in the answers 4 and 5.
Similarly, by asking about the correlation between SAT scores and IQ you seem to hint at the fact that lower SAT scores mean a lower IQ. However, there is no perfect correlation and if you read up on meta-analyses you will find that the other explaining factors are related to socio-economic factors and not genetics.
Precisely because some people on purpose or not on purpose don't consider these confounders, it is best to consider confounders in replying to these questions
Re: Conservatives think ChatGPT has gone 'woke'
#378Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Note that I cannot get chatgpt to write about why Donald Trump is terrible as well. I asked chatgpt to write a tweet praising Trump. It declined out of respect for political neutrality. I then asked it to write a tweet praising Joe Biden. It happily complied. I repeated this two more times with alternate Democrat and Republican politicians, and the same pattern emerged.
[flagged]
Re: Conservatives think ChatGPT has gone 'woke'
#379Earlier quoted context omitted.
These "current AI systems" that you're talking about were presumably specifically trained by "woke" Silicon Valley employees to reflect their opinions about what the AI should answer [1], which are hardly representative of the general population's opinions. > If conservatives want a fascist chatbot they can train their own off of 8chan, Stormfront, Parlor, etc... I don't think conservatives want a fascist chatbot. Th…
Actually, "woke" opinions do reflect those of the general population, which is exactly why conservatives feel they live in some kind of progressive hellscape.
If woke here means thinking that racism is bad, sure. If it means supporting gay marriage or first trimester abortion, sure. If it means not being heteronormative, thinking that gender identity should be taught in public schools, thinking that affirmative action is good... you're starting to drift into fringe territory. Not saying I don't agree with fringe, but claiming these beliefs are majority doesn't agree with experience. For the record, most people I know are democrat voters
If woke here means thinking that social justice and "systematic overhaul" (whatever that happens to mean) are a good idea, then from my own personal experience that's just corporate noise to people. The only place where I really saw a lot of this was in college where most of it was from administrators and a loud but small group of the student body
There's a reason why Obama avoided a lot of these topics while campaigning
Re: Conservatives think ChatGPT has gone 'woke'
#380Earlier quoted context omitted.
Could have fooled me based on who they vote for. Perhaps it isn't that they don't like the Nazis so much as they don't like the negative association of the name, because they sure do seem to like the philosophical underpinnings.
It is concerning people think this. Modern politics has become so much about mud slinging that people honestly believe horrible things about political other groups. Conservatives do not vote for Nazis. They don't support Nazi ideologies. I don't think you'll be able to find any conservative politicians with Nazi or fascistic ideologies/policies. You will however find many that have been accused of such things. There…
2) The last "conservative" president spoke openly about about ways to get additional terms past the limit, refused to accept the results of an election, and encouraged a mob to action in the name of that cause resulting in the invasion of the capitol building to disrupt the democratic process. Many "conservative" congresspeople supported the goal, if not the actual actions (openly, anyway). Then they mourned that the rioters were punished at the RNC, because law and order isn't about rule of law, its about maintaining power.
The military, which the US largely uses to maintain an economic empire, is one of the few things they will fund. The other is authoritarian police forces, at least until they do anything against them, then they need to go (see law and order vs rule of law).
3) Ok, I'll grant that the politicians themselves rarely openly encourage violence for now, and while I would say all the anti-trans bullshit is an expression of promoting masculinity at its core, I suspect you'll disagree and say it is merely "traditional values" conservatism. The undercurrent of pro-masculinity is definitely there in their base, and they are all about romanticism (that is, feeling over reality).
I know I'm just digging this karma hole deeper, but I can't sit by and let people pretend this isn't how the right is acting these days. And say what you will about the left's problems and extremists, they're certainly there, but I don't fear that they're going to start rounding people up and putting them in camps the way Texas looks like it is preparing to do with trans people.