Earlier quoted context omitted.
> ChatGPT, Dall-e, etc all make assumptions about identity or politics but try to sidestep direct requests around those topics to appear more neutral... but the bias still exists in the model and affects the answers. In the case of ChatGPT, I’d love to know how much of the bias is in the original (pre)training data, and how much is due to OpenAI’s human trainers. It is so careful to avoid every bias which is condemne…
I think the bigger issue is that the racial/sexist/etc content can be shocking and immediately put someone off using the product, which I doubt is the case for the output being “too American.”
OpenAI didn't just fine-tune it to avoid blatant racial/sexist/etc content, they openly claim to have invested a lot of effort in fine-tuning it to avoid subtle biases in those areas.
And to be honest, a lot of people do feel "put off" by poorly localised products – I am annoyed by software that defaults to US Letter and inches and I have to manually change it to A4 and metric, or which has hardcoded MM/DD/YYYY date formats. ChatGPT gives me the same feeling. Sometimes one just has to endure it because there is no better option.
Under international law, "racial discrimination" is defined to include "any distinction, exclusion, restriction or preference based on race, colour, descent, or national or ethnic origin..." [0] – so US-centricism may fit under that definition.
[0] International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, article 1(1). https://www.ohchr.org/en/instruments-mechanisms/instruments/...