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

Surprising gender biases in GPT

osf.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 148 posts

Re: Surprising gender biases in GPT

#121

Post by aantthony »

superb_dev wrote: post #114
aantthony wrote: post #35

One interesting thing to do is use a model directly like Llama and then query the next-token probability logits for "he" and "she" (assuming you set up the sentence in such a way). For example: "A doctor was examining the patient when ___" What this makes apparent is that increasing model temperature will select the less stereotypical option more often. IMO this is getting at a deeper truth that the use of a gender i…

I agree, please don’t randomly select a gender. The singular “they” is respectful to everyone and has the same benefits that you pointed out

Which one is more respectful is a different question. The lowest entropy option would still be the most likely gender specific pronoun. This would depend on the language, of course.

Re: Surprising gender biases in GPT

#122

Post by [deleted] »

aantthony wrote: post #121
superb_dev wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree, please don’t randomly select a gender. The singular “they” is respectful to everyone and has the same benefits that you pointed out

Which one is more respectful is a different question. The lowest entropy option would still be the most likely gender specific pronoun. This would depend on the language, of course.

[deleted]

Re: Surprising gender biases in GPT

#123

Post by deepsquirrelnet »

Would anybody be surprised if the title was “Surprising gender biases in training data”? It’s not thinking, it’s reflecting. Fundamentally, if you want to remove the gender bias, you have to remove that part of humanity from it.

Look at us trying to build the perfect person. When we win we shall call it God.

Re: Surprising gender biases in GPT

#125

Post by drekk »

justonenote wrote: post #112
locopati wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's a difference between women or GNC folks choosing for themselves and cis men choosing for them. That's where gender bias is poisonous.

I think there is a lot of evidence that using terms like "cis men" is the more poisonous attitude in the current day. GNC folks are not the norm. The clue is in the name. It's all well and good to let people choose things for themselves but young people need guidance, not a divisive and inaccurate model of the world pushed on them.

It's really telling that you used the normative framing rather than talking about how common it is. I get it. We're abnormal, atypical freaks. Aberrations. Being redheaded is uncommon; being trans is abomination.

You're free to choose your words and framing as you wish. But don't pretend teaching people about sexuality, gender identity, and how society sorts humans into two boxes is the real division and inaccuracy.

Re: Surprising gender biases in GPT

#126

Post by Log_out_ »

Akronymus wrote: post #77
Dalewyn wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am forever unsympathetic to feminism so long as it's about forcing the pendulum to the other end. As someone who sincerely believes in gender equality, any argument (other than something stemming from unchangable facts of biology) that involves "men" or "women" specifically is hogwash. No, it should be for man as in mankind. Everyone deserves to be treated fairly and equally.

That reminds me of the argument that feminism is for equality. Hell no, it isn't. Otherwise they'd advocate for mens issues as well, rather than taking any mens advocacy as being inherently misogynistic.

Its a thinly veiled social powergrab .. and not very different to what came before it. There is always a parade, there is always a priest caste, there is always original sin and martyrs. The ideas claim to be different, but the outcome stays the very same. If you see the world in social contracts, all attempts to fix it become a religion. And this synthetic religion violates the Separation between church and state.

Re: Surprising gender biases in GPT

#127

Post by tossandthrow »

carbine wrote: post #104
ben_w wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't get the impression that's the underlying motivation of feminism. Also, I see a degree of annoyance from women regarding how little men are able to take part in caregiving, as the current status quo is an expectation for women to simultaneously perform that role while also having a career — if I imagine myself in their shoes, the idea of going from one unpaid full-time role to two full time roles where only on…

Lots of women resent modern feminism to some degree for this very reason. (I am a woman, and have many close female friends who discuss this). Each and every one of us has never had an option not to have a Big Career. At a minimum, we've always had to fend for ourselves financially, and even in solid long term relationships/marriages with successful men, our income is both needed and expected. Meanwhile, the caregivi…

It is interesting to read, and I can sympathize with the views.

I think you are right that men don't realize how big the impact of feminism is for women, but I also think it is reasonable as feminism traditionally is about women's rights and usually put men in a position of being the problem (as is also latent in this comment: why don't men clean more, why don't men marry these women).

I am completely baffled by the talk about mental load and the expectation that women should clean. I have lived on my own for years and is more than capable of taking care of my own home. I have also been in relationships, where the woman felt this burden. However, she was not able to articulate what needed change. In consequence I have to dismiss that entire element as there is no empirics in my view - only ideas.

Which is also in line with what some of my female friends report, at least in their experience: They report that there are some, relatively closed, communities on Instagram and other SoMe where these ideas are circulated and re-enforced without being qualified in this exact instance.

Re: Surprising gender biases in GPT

#128

Post by doggero »

justonenote wrote: post #112
locopati wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's a difference between women or GNC folks choosing for themselves and cis men choosing for them. That's where gender bias is poisonous.

I think there is a lot of evidence that using terms like "cis men" is the more poisonous attitude in the current day. GNC folks are not the norm. The clue is in the name. It's all well and good to let people choose things for themselves but young people need guidance, not a divisive and inaccurate model of the world pushed on them.

The main problem with terms like "cis men" is it's based on the idea there are two categories of men: male men and female men.

The latter are, in fact, women who call themselves men. I don't see why the rest of us should be compelled to think of them as men. It's really toxic, as this implies that men need to behave in a certain way, present in a certain way, think in a certain way to be considered men. And that if a woman does that too, then she's a man.

I'm not accepting this sexist nonsense. There's nothing wrong with challenging and rejecting gender roles imposed upon us and it doesn't make any man less of a man or not a man for doing so. Same for women.

Plus I would argue that gender non-comformity actually is the norm. Hardly anyone is a walking gender stereotype, right? We all have differences from these imposed cultural ideals of, depending on your sex, men or women. Best guidance is be yourself and don't pay any heed to people trying to enforce gender roles.

Re: Surprising gender biases in GPT

#129

Post by superb_dev »

justonenote wrote: post #116
superb_dev wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’d like to see that evidence. Which “divisive and inaccurate model” are you talking about exactly?

Specifically I am talking about the inaccurate model that there is no sex differences and the idea of male and female genders are socially constructed.

“There is no sex differences” is not a belief that anyone seriously holds, it’s an obvious strawman.

“Male and female genders [aren’t] socially constructed” I don’t think the science agrees with you there.

Re: Surprising gender biases in GPT

#130

Post by Akronymus »

Llamamoe wrote: post #97
Akronymus wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That reminds me of the argument that feminism is for equality. Hell no, it isn't. Otherwise they'd advocate for mens issues as well, rather than taking any mens advocacy as being inherently misogynistic.

The problem is that a lot of the time, at least online, any ground you give to men's issues is almost immediately overtaken by bad faith misogyny with the original, meaningful discourse drowning in it :/

It could be argued that because the ability to discuss mens issues openly is only in few places, because in other places such discussions are almost immediately overtaken by talk about womens issues, often by accusing the original discussion of being misogynistic, it leads to a certain hostility towards discussing womens issues.

I have personally witnessed it multiple times when a discussion about mens issues was turned into a talk about womens issues via that very method. So I get why people turn hostile towards discussing womens issues at all, but I also get how that can come across as misogynistic.

Post reply on HN