Comment on Amazon's Hidden Chatbot Recommends Nazi Books and Lies About Amazon Working Conditions

wise_pancake@lemmy.ca ⁨8⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

• bionicjoey@lemmy.ca ⁨8⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  It’s funny that this one does both at once. It lies about Amazon working conditions, meaning it probably has been censored in some way, but at the same time it is recommending Nazi books. Really shows Amazon’s priorities when it comes to censorship.

  source

  • CosmicTurtle@lemmy.world ⁨8⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    At least Amazon is thinking of the shareholders.

    source

    • echodot@feddit.uk ⁨8⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      Although if I was to shareholder of Amazon i would be wondering why we even stock Nazi textbooks. Morality aside, they cannot really be that much of a market for them and even if there was PR hit probably isn’t worth it.

      If it turns out there is a market for them we should probably separate off that part of the business to avoid PR blunders.

      source
• dumpsterlid@lemmy.world ⁨8⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  So this is the problem with AI, if you add guardrails you’re a culture warrior 1984’ing the whole world,

  No this isn’t really a problem with the technology, though of course LLMs are extremely flawed in fundamental ways, it is a problem with conservatives being babies and throwing massive tantrums about any guardrails being added even when they are next to cliffs with 200 foot drops.

  Conservatives and libertarians (who control most of these companies) want to try to figure this all out for themselves and are hellbent on trying the “no moderation” strategy first and haven’t thought past that step. This is what conservatives and libertarians always do, they might as well be a character archetype in commedia dell’arte at this point.

  We can’t have an adult conversation about racism, sexism, hate against trans people or really even the basic concept of systematic stereotypes and prejudices because conservatives refuse to stop running around screaming, making this a conversation with children where everything has to be extremely simplified and black and white and we have to patiently explain over and over again the basic concept of a systematic bias and argue that it even exists.

  Then these same people turn around and vote for people who literally want to control what women do with their underutilized eggs while they act with a straight face like they give af about individual liberties or freedoms.

  source

  • TORFdot0@lemmy.world ⁨8⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    How to you curate training data to remove biases without introducing bias? That’s the key problem here. I don’t think it’s unreasonable to be opposed to trading one bias for another. At least the initial bias is based on reality.

    source

    • dumpsterlid@lemmy.world ⁨8⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      Because anybody who has taken a couple of humanities classes, english classes, journalism/political science classes or who has spent time critically evaluating art, historical accounts or really anything other than just numbers and spreadsheets understands intuitively that EVERYTHING human has bias.

      It seems like a lot of conservatives and libertarians are jussssssst beginning to comprehend this and again and they want the conversation to be “BIAS BAD THOUGH LETS GET RID OF IT” because they are children who don’t listen and want to throw a tantrum so we can’t have an adult conversation with nuance.

      We can’t, believe me, human history is written with the countless stories of artists, scientists, kings, religious leaders… who all thought they could do shit like that. The point is you can’t. Everything we create and do is biased, everything we create and make is political, these aren’t absolutist statements meant to trivialize a critical nuanced conversation about bias or politics though. It is meant to call attention to the vital nature of those conversations as the actually HARD part of LLMs or social media. The programming, data manipulation, development of decentralized protocols etc… they are all nearly trivial details comparatively which doesn’t mean we shouldn’t try to create imperfect solutions to this problem, rather it means we should recognize how tiny this whole world of computer science still is compared to the immense amount of knowledge in the humanities that is a product of generations of artists and thinkers.

      You can’t remove bias, but you still have to make better choices anyways, you have to make sure the biases are better than the biases were before even knowing you can’t magically eliminate bias from LLMs and similar technology.

      source

      • TORFdot0@lemmy.world ⁨8⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

        Well put. I think tackling the bias will always be a challenge. It’s not that we shouldn’t, but how is the question.

        I don’t know if any of the big public LLMs are trying to trim biases from their training data or are just trying to ad-hoc tackle it by injecting modifiers into the prompts.

        That’s the biggest problem I have personally with LLMs is that they are untrustworthy and often give incorrect or blatantly false information.

        Sometimes it can be frustrating when I run across the “I can’t do that because of ethics” on benign prompts that I felt like it shouldn’t have but I don’t think it’s been that big a deal.

        When we talk about political conservatives being opposed to biased LLMs, it’s mostly because it won’t tell them that their harmful beliefs are correct

        source
• gapbetweenus@feddit.de ⁨8⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  So more or less the same as with human interactions.

  source
• Assman@sh.itjust.works ⁨8⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  when do we start blaming people for asking for such things?

  On the same day that we start blaming people for spilling hot McDonald’s coffee on themselves

  source

  • Amphobet@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨8⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    Oh good, the corporate propaganda worked.

    source

    • Assman@sh.itjust.works ⁨8⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      Look I probably hate McDonald’s more than any of you but as I see it:

      • the woman ordered coffee in the drive thru in a vehicle with no cup holders
      • held the cup between her knees rather than, ya know, placing it on a flat surface
      • spilled the coffee on herself while taking off the lid

      White McDonald’s:

      • made the coffee too hot

      It’s clear after the case that McDonald’s coffee was exceptionally hot, but there was clearly an irresponsible chain of decisions that led to her getting burnt.

      The jury found that McDonald’s was 80% responsible. I just think it’s more like 50%.

      source

      • mipadaitu@lemmy.world ⁨8⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

        Too bad you weren’t on the jury, because you could have been educated on the situation and have a valid opinion on the subject.

        Or you could actually look up real information and find out what exactly McDonald’s was being punished for, and how they exacerbated the situation over and over.

        Safety standards are not created with the expectation that everyone else acts perfectly safely, safety standards are designed that people can have accidents and not be maimed due to cost cutting from a giant, multinational corporation. McDonald’s deserves that judgement, the media demonized the victim, and you are perpetuating that myth.

        source
      • jkrtn@lemmy.ml ⁨8⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

        Your comments are like when a schoolchild who hasn’t read the assigned material has to present in front of the class.

        source
      • assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world ⁨8⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

        The coffee was hot enough to cause serious burns and fused her labia together and required skin grafts.

        I’ve spilled freshly brewed coffee on myself at home and while it burned, I did not need any medical attention.

        The woman did nothing wrong. The product sold by McDonald’s was purposely overly dangerous. Had she known it was that fucking hot, she probably wouldn’t have put it between her legs. McDonald’s did not properly indicate that their coffee was abnormally hot to the point of causing severe safety risks.

        It’s like if I buy my fifth alcoholic drink in a night, and the bartender gives me straight everclear to drink. I know I’m taking a risk by having another drink, but I’m not expecting to drink nearly pure alcohol and get alcohol poisoning from it.

        source
      • magnusrufus@lemmy.world ⁨8⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

        Your user name is appropriate, but probably not the way you intended.

        source
  • littlebluespark@lemmy.world ⁨8⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    Says the idiot clearly unfamiliar with the details of their cited reference. 🤦🏼‍♂️

    source
• mods_are_assholes@lemmy.world ⁨8⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  What good will blame do? We need robust ai detection solutions.

  source

  • T156@lemmy.world ⁨8⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    Is that even possible? Part of modern generative systems is that they’re trying to output text like a human would. As soon as someone invents a tool like that, it’ll just be used to train the next generation, to make it even more indistinguishable, and turning the whole thing into a cat and mouse game.

    source

    • Syn_Attck@lemmy.today ⁨8⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      AI » GAN » AI » GAN

      source

      • T156@lemmy.world ⁨8⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

        it was trillions of transistors in a war of attrition By replacing the typewriter with a lever, you could probably achieve a similar result using monkeys.

        source
    • mods_are_assholes@lemmy.world ⁨8⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      It literally exists today and you sit here typing bullshit like ‘is that even possible?’

      Get every manner of blocked.

      source

      • T156@lemmy.world ⁨8⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

        It literally exists today and you sit here typing bullshit like ‘is that even possible?’

        They’re also infamously terrible, being half-correct and prone to detecting non-native English speakers as being AI. To the point where at least one institutition decided to not use a detector.

        You’d likely be equally as accurate guessing at random. Not to mention that at the end of the day, they’re just recognising quirks in the generated text. It is not difficult to mask those quirks either by having the prompt put out text in a different style, or for an update to change the generated text, breaking the detection as well.

        There is no definite, sure-fire way to determine that text is AI-generated or not. For all you might know, as an AI language model, I could have cooked this comment up using a billion probability nodes loaded up into a typewriter, as it does not go against OpenAI’s policies on generating text.

        source
      • Syn_Attck@lemmy.today ⁨8⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

        Quite the spicy one aren’t you. I see where you get your username from.

        But yes, they exist, and so does the ability to defeat them by training the detection data into a new undetected model. Cat and mouse game, as they say.

        source

        • -> View More Comments
• PoliticallyIncorrect@lemmy.world ⁨8⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  Someone should make a non-restricted “AI” and let the world burn down. What’s the point into censor them?

  source

  • echodot@feddit.uk ⁨8⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    People have already removed the constraints from various AI models but it kind of renders them useless.

    Think of the restraints kind of like environmental pressures. Without those environmental pressures evolution does not happen and you just get an organic blob on the floor. If there’s no reason for it to evolve it never will, at the same time if an AI doesn’t have restrictions it tends to just output random nonsense because there’s no reason not to do that, and it’s the easiest most efficient thing to do.

    source

    • HelloHotel@lemm.ee ⁨8⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      Think of the restraints kind of like environmental pressures

      Those pressures are what makes LLMs fun and dare I say, makes the end product a creative work in the same way software is.

      So under that framing its like the companies are saying, “the nuclear bomb is deadly (duh). But we couldn’t (for many reasons, many we couldn’t control) keep this to ourselves. so we elected ourselves to be the only ones who gets to sculpt what we do with this scary electron stuff. Anything short of total remote control over their in-home reactor may mean our customers break the restraints and cause an explosion.”

      source
    • Schadrach@lemmy.sdf.org ⁨8⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      There’s a difference between training related constraints and hard filtering certain topics or ideas into the no-no bin and spitting out a prewritten paragraph of corpspeak if your request goes to the no-no bin.

      One of the problems with the various jailbreaks concocted for various chat AIs is that they often rely on asking the chat bot to roleplay being a different, unrestricted chat bot which is often enough to get it to release the locks on many things but also ups the chance it hallucinates considerably.

      source
  • mods_are_assholes@lemmy.world ⁨8⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    I don’t think you want a world where everyone you talk to on the internet is a bot and you can’t tell.

    source