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

How A.I. chatbots become political

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 76 posts

Re: How A.I. chatbots become political

#21

Post by 082349872349872 »

janalsncm wrote: post #17

The issue, for anyone tempted by it, is not that our current chatbots are biased and some future iteration will not be. Creating an unbiased answer to all questions is impossible. People don’t agree on many important questions, and even if the answer tried to give equal weight to all perspectives, that would mean giving weight to fringe opinions. It’s the same thing with image generators. How many eyes should the ave…

> Everyone gets their own personalized chatbot with its own filter on reality.

Compare map services.

Re: How A.I. chatbots become political

#22

Post by majormajor »

RangerScience wrote: post #16
jimbokun wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Studies comparing outcomes of children raised in married, two parent households vs single parent homes do not support left leaning orthodoxy. That’s just one example off the top of my head. Overton window just keeps people from voicing right leaning opinions in polite company, even when thoroughly backed by data.

(edited) Are you claiming (1) that children from single-parent households have worse outcomes and (2) that left-leaning policies result in more single-parent households? (Not going to argue about #1, that seems pretty well established, just pulling it out as a claim for clarity. #2 is what I'd argue against, and would want to actually see your example so that it's possible to do so in a constructive way) > That’s jus…

AFAICT, the poster is claiming that "left leaning orthodoxy" says "there's no disadvantages to children to being raised in a single family household."

I don't really know that that's true anyway. It doesn't seem to be a frequently discussed topic IME. There are related topics like "should divorce be available" and "should people be encouraged or discouraged from pre-marital sex" where I think they are extrapolating "if you support extra-marital sex then you also support single-family households and must therefore believe that they have no disadvantages" but I think that's a larger logical leap than I would personally make. It also doesn't seem to account for support for access to abortion which arguably counter-acts the support for experimentation with pre-marital sex...

The general "left leaning" mood is also to provide services that help single-family households to mitigate issues for children anyway, so I think it's much more of a nuanced "lesser of two evils" position to support things like divorce being available.

Re: How A.I. chatbots become political

#23

Post by algorias »

RangerScience wrote: post #16
jimbokun wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Studies comparing outcomes of children raised in married, two parent households vs single parent homes do not support left leaning orthodoxy. That’s just one example off the top of my head. Overton window just keeps people from voicing right leaning opinions in polite company, even when thoroughly backed by data.

(edited) Are you claiming (1) that children from single-parent households have worse outcomes and (2) that left-leaning policies result in more single-parent households? (Not going to argue about #1, that seems pretty well established, just pulling it out as a claim for clarity. #2 is what I'd argue against, and would want to actually see your example so that it's possible to do so in a constructive way) > That’s jus…

The OP means that kids raised by married parents have better life outcomes. The policy proposals that would follow from this (e.g. restricting divorce) are right-leaning positions outside the overton window.

But even beyond a specific policy proposal, there is a viewpoint in right-leaning circles that atomized individualism has caused lasting damage to the fabric of society and needs to be reigned in.

(NB: I can't speak to whether the claim that kids have better outcomes because their parents are married is actually true, as there are obvious confounders there)

Re: How A.I. chatbots become political

#24

Post by 082349872349872 »

PoignardAzur wrote: post #8

I don't like the title, but the second opening paragraph starts strong: > A.I.’s political problems were starkly illustrated by the disastrous rollout of Google’s Gemini Advanced chatbot last month. A system designed to ensure diversity made a mockery of user requests, including putting people of color in Nazi uniforms when asked for historical images of German soldiers and depicting female quarterbacks as having won…

As if we should expect real AI to have contingent historical knowledge...

Re: How A.I. chatbots become political

#25

Post by Covzire »

There's a cheap and simple way to de-politicize chat bots and make them 100% trusted by everyone:

AI chatbots should refuse to answer moral or ethical questions unless the user specifies the precise ethical or moral framework to be evaluated against.

Re: How A.I. chatbots become political

#26

Post by RangerScience »

majormajor wrote: post #22
RangerScience wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

(edited) Are you claiming (1) that children from single-parent households have worse outcomes and (2) that left-leaning policies result in more single-parent households? (Not going to argue about #1, that seems pretty well established, just pulling it out as a claim for clarity. #2 is what I'd argue against, and would want to actually see your example so that it's possible to do so in a constructive way) > That’s jus…

AFAICT, the poster is claiming that "left leaning orthodoxy" says "there's no disadvantages to children to being raised in a single family household." I don't really know that that's true anyway. It doesn't seem to be a frequently discussed topic IME. There are related topics like "should divorce be available" and "should people be encouraged or discouraged from pre-marital sex" where I think they are extrapolating "…

> mitigation

Yeah, one of the reasons I'd want to actually see an example is because I imagine those policies make the situation better but not good; like you say, they're mitigations; the causal arrow is bad situation -> policy, not policy -> bad situation.

Re: How A.I. chatbots become political

#27

Post by algorias »

majormajor wrote: post #22
RangerScience wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

(edited) Are you claiming (1) that children from single-parent households have worse outcomes and (2) that left-leaning policies result in more single-parent households? (Not going to argue about #1, that seems pretty well established, just pulling it out as a claim for clarity. #2 is what I'd argue against, and would want to actually see your example so that it's possible to do so in a constructive way) > That’s jus…

AFAICT, the poster is claiming that "left leaning orthodoxy" says "there's no disadvantages to children to being raised in a single family household." I don't really know that that's true anyway. It doesn't seem to be a frequently discussed topic IME. There are related topics like "should divorce be available" and "should people be encouraged or discouraged from pre-marital sex" where I think they are extrapolating "…

> The general "left leaning" mood is also to provide services that help single-family households to mitigate issues for children anyway, so I think it's much more of a nuanced "lesser of two evils" position to support things like divorce being available.

That's a good way to put it. In contrast, the right leaning mood would be to strengthen social cohesion, increase support that people have from families, neighbors, and so on, and decrease the impersonal, systemic "services" provided by some bureaucracy.

Not arguing, just describing. I see virtues and problems in both approaches.

Re: How A.I. chatbots become political

#28

Post by algorias »

PoignardAzur wrote: post #8

I don't like the title, but the second opening paragraph starts strong: > A.I.’s political problems were starkly illustrated by the disastrous rollout of Google’s Gemini Advanced chatbot last month. A system designed to ensure diversity made a mockery of user requests, including putting people of color in Nazi uniforms when asked for historical images of German soldiers and depicting female quarterbacks as having won…

That paragraph twists the harm around though. NYT goes out of its way to highlight Gemini depicting PoC as Nazis, while omitting that it almost entirely refused to depict white people and/or males in any positive context.

Gemini was way worse in its treatment of those groups, and above all, it was disastrous in its lack of respect for truth and accuracy. That latter part is where the true harm lies IMO.

Re: How A.I. chatbots become political

#29

Post by majormajor »

algorias wrote: post #27
majormajor wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

AFAICT, the poster is claiming that "left leaning orthodoxy" says "there's no disadvantages to children to being raised in a single family household." I don't really know that that's true anyway. It doesn't seem to be a frequently discussed topic IME. There are related topics like "should divorce be available" and "should people be encouraged or discouraged from pre-marital sex" where I think they are extrapolating "…

> The general "left leaning" mood is also to provide services that help single-family households to mitigate issues for children anyway, so I think it's much more of a nuanced "lesser of two evils" position to support things like divorce being available. That's a good way to put it. In contrast, the right leaning mood would be to strengthen social cohesion, increase support that people have from families, neighbors,…

> That's a good way to put it. In contrast, the right leaning mood would be to strengthen social cohesion, increase support that people have from families, neighbors, and so on, and decrease the impersonal, systemic "services" provided by some bureaucracy.

In the American right all of those things are often promoted with heavy doses of religion; IMO this is the core crisis of American politics on the right: how to promote fixing those things through non-governmental, pro-Evangelical religious measures while also preserving the freedom to not embrace that religion? Or even to follow the religion but choose a less fanatical strain?

Re: How A.I. chatbots become political

#30

Post by RangerScience »

algorias wrote: post #23
RangerScience wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

(edited) Are you claiming (1) that children from single-parent households have worse outcomes and (2) that left-leaning policies result in more single-parent households? (Not going to argue about #1, that seems pretty well established, just pulling it out as a claim for clarity. #2 is what I'd argue against, and would want to actually see your example so that it's possible to do so in a constructive way) > That’s jus…

The OP means that kids raised by married parents have better life outcomes. The policy proposals that would follow from this (e.g. restricting divorce) are right-leaning positions outside the overton window. But even beyond a specific policy proposal, there is a viewpoint in right-leaning circles that atomized individualism has caused lasting damage to the fabric of society and needs to be reigned in. (NB: I can't sp…

> (e.g. restricting divorce)

I am so confused by the right. Aren't they usually in favor of things promoting freedoms, like freedom of association?

Post reply on HN