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

Keep your AI claims in check

ftc.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 308 posts

Re: Keep your AI claims in check

#91

Post by threeseed »

danielmarkbruce wrote: post #60
makeitdouble wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn’t it their purpose to set the boundaries ?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Trade_Commission The first section is a decent summary. Blog posts making casual threats about AI claims is a long way from appropriate. There are places for formality, and the law is one of them. There are serious people quitting the FTC over current leadership, claiming they engaged in behavior that is wildly overstepping their legal authority.

It is not only appropriate but normal for regulators to try to affect behaviour without having to resort to enforcement activities.

And an informal blog post in a less-legalese tone is a welcome way to do this.

Re: Keep your AI claims in check

#92

Post by danielmarkbruce »

threeseed wrote: post #87
danielmarkbruce wrote: post #47

The FTC shouldn't be threatening citizens and companies in random blog posts. It's inappropriate. The FTC appears to have some serious problems at the moment.

FTC is a regulator whose "principal mission is the enforcement of civil (non-criminal) antitrust law". So it is completely fine for them to remind citizens and companies of their obligations. Especially given in the AI space there is so much questionable behaviour going on.

This is not a reminder. It's a casual threat.

And minor nit - this has nothing to do with antitrust. If you were going to highlight their mission, at least show the deceptive practices part.

Re: Keep your AI claims in check

#93

Post by witnesser2 »

mr_toad wrote: post #72
pretendgeneer wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the system your building is "mathematically impossible" to explain in a way that would be expected of every other system. Maybe you shouldn't be building that system.

Non-linear models often perform better. You’re never going to approach anything like GPT with a linear model.

I don't think mentioning non-linearality means you can bypass the singularities you may cause typically CUSP, buckling etc and omit the analysis intentionally or negeliccantly.

Re: Keep your AI claims in check

#94

Post by npunt »

amelius wrote: post #38
dylan604 wrote: post #4

wow, i would not have imagined a gov't agency to be agile enough to release something like this. i'm kind of impressed. here's to hoping this isn't just all bark and there's some actual teeth to his.

> here's to hoping this isn't just all bark and there's some actual teeth to his. Let's see what the article says: > When you talk about AI in your advertising, the FTC may be wondering, among other things: (...) Just "wondering", no teeth.

"Wondering" = discovery = you're going to have a bad time

Re: Keep your AI claims in check

#95

Post by gandalfgeek »

Just me, or does this read like a Godfather-style warning?

"Nice AI product you got over there. Would be a shame if something happened to it."

But what's different about this AI product/hype cycle compared to every other cycle that tech has had? Why does the FTC feel the need to make proactive enforcement warnings about this one? What about crypto? Or going back further, the dotcom era?

Re: Keep your AI claims in check

#96

Post by civilized »

jsemrau wrote: post #68

We are working on an AI product in a highly regulated industry (Investing). Recently we have been experimenting using the GPT3 API as a Junior Equity Analyst. On an eyeball check the results of the technology are impressive. The problem is that there is no way to validate the feedback on scale. I.e., we can't receive statistics about the feedback from the API. In contrast, for our own Entity Recognition models we can…

GPT is a voluble, entertaining bullshitter that is occasionally correct. It is not reliable, and for now, it cannot be made reliable.

It is a very impressive toy, but still just a toy for now.

Re: Keep your AI claims in check

#97

Post by danielmarkbruce »

threeseed wrote: post #91
danielmarkbruce wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Trade_Commission The first section is a decent summary. Blog posts making casual threats about AI claims is a long way from appropriate. There are places for formality, and the law is one of them. There are serious people quitting the FTC over current leadership, claiming they engaged in behavior that is wildly overstepping their legal authority.

It is not only appropriate but normal for regulators to try to affect behaviour without having to resort to enforcement activities. And an informal blog post in a less-legalese tone is a welcome way to do this.

There is no place to make informal threats in blog posts. It's not welcome at all.

Nobody said anything about enforcement activities. The FTC have all kinds of mechanisms to make it known what the rules are. Like, the rules themselves, notices, policy statements, what amounts to position papers, etc. This isn't kindergarten and the citizens of the united states aren't children. Blog posts with friendly tone and threats of punishment for ill-behavior simply isn't appropriate.

Re: Keep your AI claims in check

#98

Post by witnesser2 »

foxes wrote: post #69
pretendgeneer wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the system your building is "mathematically impossible" to explain in a way that would be expected of every other system. Maybe you shouldn't be building that system.

Mathematical explanation is not required in many areas. Perhaps you can’t perfectly explain it but you can at least understand it statistically. For example is not currently possible to mathematically explain people’s behaviour, but there is statistical evidence and also accountability on an individual. Eg a doctor making a decision about a scan result.

I raise another example, to question, you can statistically solve the famous diffusion problem.

Re: Keep your AI claims in check

#99

Post by fancyfredbot »

peepeepoopoo3 wrote: post #89
threeseed wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google already is AI-enabled search. And it's questionable whether that GPT sidebar feature is even worth it or not given how inaccurate it is.

That is extremely disingenuous. Google search is absolutely not AI-enabled in the same manner that ChatGPT and Phind are, and all of their attempts to develop that sort of functionality have crashed and burned.

Google have been using the BERT language model to drive their search results for several years. It's not the same as chatGPT but it is still what most people would call AI.

Re: Keep your AI claims in check

#100

Post by dizzydes »

gandalfgeek wrote: post #95

Just me, or does this read like a Godfather-style warning? "Nice AI product you got over there. Would be a shame if something happened to it." But what's different about this AI product/hype cycle compared to every other cycle that tech has had? Why does the FTC feel the need to make proactive enforcement warnings about this one? What about crypto? Or going back further, the dotcom era?

Very good question.

On one hand, the US is surely happy that they’re the epicentre, on the other hand the potential impact on unemployment (fiscal and social unrest) is massive….

Post reply on HN