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

AI behavior guardrails should be public

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

281–290 of 350 posts

Re: AI behavior guardrails should be public

#281

Post by anomaly_ »

serial_dev wrote: post #174
ianbicking wrote: post #140

I've never been involved with implementing large-scale moderation or content controls, but it seems pretty standard that underlying automated rules aren't generally public, and I've always assumed this is because there's a kind of necessary "security through obscurity" aspect to them. E.g., publish a word blocklist and people can easily find how to express problematic things using words that aren't on the list. Thing…

There is no need to implement large scale censorship and moderation in this case. Where is the security concern? That I can generate images of white people in various situations for my five minutes of entertainment? The whole premise of your argument doesn't make sense. I'm talking to a computer, nobody gets hurt. It's like censoring what I write in my notes app vs. what I write on someone's Facebook wall. In one cas…

When someone unironically uses the term "problematic" you can reasonably assume the position they are going to argue from...

Re: AI behavior guardrails should be public

#282

Post by anomaly_ »

int_19h wrote: post #216
tobbe2064 wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Its not really a question about want, its a question about facts. Their actions will make a significant mark on the future. So far it seems like they are trying to promote positive changes such as inclusion and equality. Which is far far far fucking really infinitely far better than trying to promote exclusion and inequality

Can you please explain how outright refusing to draw an image with from the prompt "white male scientist", and instead giving a lecture on how their race is irrelevant to their occupation, but then happily drawing the requested image when prompted for "black female scientist", is promoting inclusion and equality?

He can't.

Re: AI behavior guardrails should be public

#283

Post by callalex »

AnarchismIsCool wrote: post #186
grotorea wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So you're saying in a way this is /pol/ and Tay's fault?

Looks around at everything ...is there anything that isn't 4chan's fault at this point? Realistically, kinda. There have always been tons of anecdotes of video conference systems not following black people, cameras not white balancing correctly on darker faces etc. That era of SV was plagued by systems that were built by a bunch of young white guys who never tested them with anyone else. I'm not saying they were inhe…

I’m always hesitant to jump straight to ringing the racism bell when it comes to problems that arise from fundamental physics. I have dark skin, and I constantly struggle with automatic faucets, soap dispensers, and towel dispensers in public bathrooms. None of those are made by big tech.

Re: AI behavior guardrails should be public

#284

Post by jjjjj55555 »

felipeerias wrote: post #279
jjjjj55555 wrote: post #226

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also, these tools are used world-wide and "diversity" means different things in different places. Somehow it's always only the US ideal of diversity that gets shipped abroad.

US companies systematically push US cultural beliefs and expectations. People in the US probably don’t notice it any more, but it’s pretty obvious from those of us on the receiving end of US cultural domination. This fact is an unavoidable consequence of the socioeconomic realities of the world, but it obviously clashes with these companies’ public statements and positions.

Yes but it's especially cynical in this case because the belief their pushing is that diversity matters, that biases need to be overcome, and that all people need to be represented.

Claiming all of that but then shoving your own biases down the rest of the world's throat while not representing their people in any way is especially cynical in my opinion. It undermines the whole thing.

Re: AI behavior guardrails should be public

#285

Post by felipeerias »

xdennis wrote: post #271
CamperBob2 wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As I recall, it began right after the George Floyd murder. It was clearly time for things to change, and the media latched onto that.

I think it was amplified in 2020. I hear many cite 2015 as the year things got woke. Terms like "preferred pronoun" started entering the mainstream around 2015, one year after GamerGate (not that that was the cause).

Picking a starting point is always going to be somewhat arbitrary, but the moment it became mainstream was probably when Hillary Clinton won the nomination in 2016 by explicitly moving away from economic issues:

“If we broke up the big banks tomorrow, would that end racism?”

https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/the-line...

Re: AI behavior guardrails should be public

#286

Post by pixl97 »

int_19h wrote: post #231
pixl97 wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"No" --Every company that does moderation and spam filtering. "No" --Every company that does not publish their internal business processes. "No" --Every company that does not publish their source code. Honestly I could probably think of tons of other business cases like this, but in the software world outside of open source, the answer is pretty much no.

Then we get back to square one: better no rules at all than secret rules. This would also be less of a problem if we didn't have a few companies that are economically more powerful than many small countries running everything. At least then I could vote with my feet to go somewhere the rules aren't private.

I mean, now you're hitting the real argument. Giant multinationals are a scourge to humankind.

Re: AI behavior guardrails should be public

#287

Post by photoGrant »

samatman wrote: post #261
photoGrant wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Watch your opinion on this get silenced in subtle ways. From gaslighting to thread nerfing to vote locking.... Ask why anyone would engage in those behaviours vs the merit of the arguments and the voice of the people. The strings are revealing themselves so incredibly fast. edit: my first flagged! silence is deafening ^_^. This is achieved by nerfing the thread from public view, then allow the truly caustic to alter…

[flagged]

:)

Re: AI behavior guardrails should be public

#288

Post by callalex »

photoGrant wrote: post #37
Workaccount2 wrote: post #34

Harris and who I think was either Hughes or Stewart a podcast where they talked about how cringey and out of touch the elite are on the topic of race or wokeness in general. This faux pas on google's part couldn't be a better illustration of this. A bunch of wealthy rich tech geeks programming an AI to show racial diversity in what were/are unambiguously not diverse settings. They're just so painfully divorced from r…

Watch your opinion on this get silenced in subtle ways. From gaslighting to thread nerfing to vote locking.... Ask why anyone would engage in those behaviours vs the merit of the arguments and the voice of the people. The strings are revealing themselves so incredibly fast. edit: my first flagged! silence is deafening ^_^. This is achieved by nerfing the thread from public view, then allow the truly caustic to alter…

And yet here their paragraph still is, unmoderated, on a front page story, 6 hours later. If you’re going to cry oppression, at least provide a single example.

Re: AI behavior guardrails should be public

#289

Post by noworriesnate »

jjjjj55555 wrote: post #237
Nevermark wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know that this sheds light on anything but I was curious... a picture of some 21st century scottish kings playing golf (all white) https://www.bing.com/images/create/a-picture-of-some-21st-ce... a picture of some 22nd century scottish kings playing golf (all white) https://www.bing.com/images/create/a-picture-of-some-22nd-ce... a picture of some 23rd century scottish kings playing golf (all white) https://www…

Diversity is cool, but who gets to decide what's diverse?

Good point. People of European descent have more diversity in hair color, hair texture and eye color than any other race. That’s because a lot of those traits are recessive and are only expressed in isolated gene pools (European peoples are an isolated gene pool in this sense).

Re: AI behavior guardrails should be public

#290

Post by vunderba »

nostromo wrote: post #96

It's super easy to run LLMs and Stable Diffusion locally -- and it'll do what you ask without lecturing you. If you have a beefy machine (like a Mac Studio) your local LLMs will likely run faster than OpenAI or Gemini. And you get to choose what models work best for you. Check out LM Studio which makes it super easy to run LLMs locally. AUTOMATIC1111 makes it simple to run Stable Diffusion locally. I highly recommend…

If you're just getting your feet wet, I would recommend either Fooocus (not a typo) or invokeAI. Being dropped into automatic1111 as a complete beginner feels like you're flying a fucking spaceship.
Post reply on HN