Earlier quoted context omitted.
How is racism different from stereotype? How is stereotype different from pattern recognition? These questions don't seem to go through the minds of people when developing "unbiased/impartial" technology. There is no such thing as objective. So, why pretend to be objective and unbiased, when we all know its a lie? Worst, if you pretend to be objective but aren't, then you are actually racist.
I’m tired of the “it’s not racist if aggregate statistics support my racism” thing. Racism, like other isms, means a belief that a person’s characteristics define their identity. It doesn’t matter if confounding factors mean that you can show that people of their race are associated with bad behaviors or low scores or whatever. I used GPT3.5 to generate 100 short descriptions of families for a project. Every single o…
Once we can train something to this level of quality on a fraction of the data (a highly curated data set) or create something with the ability to learn continuously, we're stuck with models like GPT-4.
You can only develop new technology like this to human standards once we understand how it works. To me, the mistake was doing a wide-scale release of the technology before we even began.
Make it work, make it right, make it fast.
We're still in the first step and don't even know what "right" means in this context. It's all "I'll know it when I see it level of correction."
We've created software that infringes on the realms of morals, culture, and social behavior. This is stuff philosophy still hasn't fully grasped. And now we're asking software engineers to teach this software morals and the right behaviors?
Even parents who have 18 years to figure this stuff out fail at teaching children their own morals regularly.