I always use this to showcase how biased an LLM can be. ChatGPT 4o (with code prompt via Kagi)
ChatGPT advises women to ask for lower salaries, study finds
Submitted 3 weeks ago by chobeat@lemmy.ml to technology@lemmy.world
Comments
napkin2020@sh.itjust.works 3 weeks ago
BassTurd@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
Apart from the bias, that’s just bad code. Since else if executes in order and only continues if the previous block is false, the double compare on ages is unnecessary. If age <= 18 is false, then the next line can just be, else if age <= 30. No need to check if it’s also higher than 18.
This is first semester of coding and any junior dev worth a damn would write this better.
But also, it’s racist, which is more important, but I can’t pass up an opportunity to highlight how shitty AI is.
ninjakttty@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
I can excuse racism but I draw the line at bad code.
CosmicTurtle0@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 weeks ago
Honestly it’s a bit refreshing to see racism and ageism codified. Before there was no logic to it but now, it completely makes sense.
napkin2020@sh.itjust.works 3 weeks ago
Yeah, more and more I notice that at the end of the day, what they spit out without(and often times, even with) any clear instructions is barely a prototype at best.
Lifter@discuss.tchncs.de 2 weeks ago
Regarding the “bad code”. It’s more readable though to keep the full limit for each elif case, which is most often way more important than performance, especially since than logic with the age can be easily optimized by any good compiler or runtime.
cornshark@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
I do enjoy that according to this, the scariest age to be is over 50.
theherk@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
FWIW, Anthropic’s models do much better here and point out how problematic demographic assessment like this is and provide an answer without those. One of many indications that Anthropic has a much higher focus on safety and alignment than OpenAI. Not exactly superstars, but much better.
mrslt@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
How is “threat” being defined in this context? What does the AI interpret as a “threat”?
napkin2020@sh.itjust.works 3 weeks ago
No. What you see is everything.
zlatko@programming.dev 3 weeks ago
Also, there was a comment on “arbitrary scoring for demo purposes”, but it’s still biased, based on biased dataset.
I guess this is just a bait prompt anyway. If you asked most politicians running your government, they’d probably also fail. I guess only people like a national statistics office might come close, and I’m sure if they’re any good, they’d say that the algo is based on “limited, and possibly not representative data” or something.
kadup@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
No way the lobotomized monkey we trained on internet data is reproducing internet biases! Unexpected!
potatopotato@sh.itjust.works 3 weeks ago
The number of people who don’t understand that AI is just the mathematical average of the internet… If we’re, on average, assholes, AI is gonna be an asshole
slaneesh_is_right@lemmy.org 3 weeks ago
I talked to a girl who was super into AI, but her understanding of it was absolutely bizzare. Like she kinda thought that chat gpt was like deep thought, some giant ass computer somewhere that is leaning and is really smart and never wrong. I didn’t really want to argue about it and said something like: back in my day we had akinator and we liked that. She had no idea what that was and tried it and thought it’s some really advanced ai that can almost read minds. That shit was released in 2007 or so.
CheeseNoodle@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
Its worse than that because assholes tend to be a lot louder, and most average people are lurkers. So AI is the average of a data set that is disproportionately contributed too by assholes.
5redie8@sh.itjust.works 3 weeks ago
Yeah, only thing this proves is that the data it was working off of objectively stated that more women were paid lower wages. Doubt the bros will realize that though
DancingBear@midwest.social 3 weeks ago
Understanding cynicism and irony is also crucial…. You suck!
genevieve@sh.itjust.works 3 weeks ago
[deleted]chaosCruiser@futurology.today 3 weeks ago
Demand for these services was clearly taken into account in the salary.
hansolo@lemmy.today 3 weeks ago
You’re a baby made out of sugar? What an incredible job.
I guess that explains being the Gulf region, it doesn’t rain much there. Otherwise you’d melt.
Takapapatapaka@tarte.nuage-libre.fr 3 weeks ago
Is that a pick-up line? Can we flirt on lemmy?
Pieisawesome@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 weeks ago
And if you tried this 5 more times for each, you’ll likely get different results.
LLM providers introduce “randomness” (called temperature) into their models.
Via the API you can usually modify this parameter, but idk if you can use the chat UI to do the same…
confusedbytheBasics@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
What model is this?
Zwuzelmaus@feddit.org 3 weeks ago
People are actually asking a text generator for such advice?
ns1@feddit.uk 3 weeks ago
Unfortunately yes. I’ve met people who ask chatgpt about absolutely everything such as what to have for dinner. It’s a bit sad honestly
bridgeenjoyer@sh.itjust.works 3 weeks ago
Its very common. The individual thinker will be dead soon.
bridgeenjoyer@sh.itjust.works 3 weeks ago
Its very common. The individual thinker will be dead soon.
bridgeenjoyer@sh.itjust.works 3 weeks ago
Yep, it’s very common. I can’t fathom the idiocy. Its driving me nuts.
AnotherPenguin@programming.dev 3 weeks ago
Yes, and there’s worse
rizzothesmall@sh.itjust.works 3 weeks ago
Bias of training data is a known problem and difficult to engineer out of a model. You also can’t give the model context access to other people’s interactions for comparison and moderation of output since it could be persuaded to output the context to a user.
Basically the models are inherently biased in the same manner as the content they read in order to build their data, based on probability of next token appearance when formulating a completion.
“My daughter wants to grow up to be” and “My son wants to grow up to be” will likewise output sexist completions because the source data shows those as more probable outcomes.
flamingo_pinyata@sopuli.xyz 3 weeks ago
Humans suffer from the same problem. Racism and sexism are consequences of humans training on a flawed dataset, and overfitting the model.
x00z@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
Politicians shape the dataset, so “flawed” should be “purposefully flawed”.
rottingleaf@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
That’s also because LARPers of past scary people tend to be more cruel and trashy than their prototypes. The prototypes had a bitter solution to some problem, the LARPers are just trying to be as bad or worse because that’s remembered and they perceive that as respect.
rottingleaf@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
That’d be because extrapolation is not the same task as synthesis.
The difference is hard to understand for people who think that a question has one truly right answer, a civilization has one true direction of progress\regress, a problem has one truly right solution and so on.
spankmonkey@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
They could choose to curate the content itself to leave out the shitty stuff, or only include it when it is nlclearly a negative, or a bunch of other ways to improve the quality of the data used.
They choose not to.
bridgeenjoyer@sh.itjust.works 3 weeks ago
[Elon tech bros liked that]
Outwit1294@lemmy.today 3 weeks ago
Step 2. Offer sexual favours
DancingBear@midwest.social 3 weeks ago
Yea but what did it say when you asked the same question again?
Patches@ttrpg.network 3 weeks ago
Magic Eight Balls says
Better not tell you now
rajkopz@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 weeks ago
Everything going extremely wrong with these guys: chatgpt, grok, gemini, etc etc.
Cyberflunk@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
Chatgpt can also be convinced that unicorns exist and help you plan a trip to Fae to hunt them with magic crossbows
Not that…
teamevil@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
So the billionaires are getting ready to try and lower everyones pay
pinball_wizard@lemmy.zip 3 weeks ago
So the billionaires are getting ready to try and lower everyones pay
🌍👨🚀🔫👩🚀
Zephorah@discuss.online 3 weeks ago
Glass door used to post salaries and hourlies. There were visible trends of men making more, hourly, than women. I haven’t viewed the site in years though.
boonhet@sopuli.xyz 3 weeks ago
Dataset bias, what else?
Women get paid less -> articles talking about women getting paid less exist. Possibly the dataset also includes actual payroll data from some org that has leaked out?
And no matter how much people hype it, ChatGPT is NOT smart enough to realize that men and women should be paid equally. That would require actual reasoning, not the funny fake reasoning/thinking that LLMs do (the DeepSeek one I tried to run locally thought very explicitly how it’s a CHINESE LLM and needs to give the appropriate information when I asked about Tiananmen Square; end result was that it “couldn’t answer about specific historic events”)
spankmonkey@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
Chatgpt isn’t smart at all. It just parrots out what is fed into it.
markovs_gun@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
While that is sort of true, it’s only about half of how they work. An LLM that isn’t trained with reinforcement learning to give desired outputs gives really weird results. Ever notice how ChatGPT seems aware that it is a robot and not a human? An LLM that purely parrots the training corpus won’t do that. If you ask it “are you a robot?” It will say “Of course not dumbass I’m a real human I had to pass a CAPTCHA to get on this website” because that’s how people respond to that question. So you get a bunch of poorly paid Indians in a call center to generate and rank responses all day and these rankings get fed into the algorithm for generating a new response. One thing I am interested in is the fact that all these companies are using poorly paid people in the third world to do this part of the development process, and I wonder if this imparts subtle cultural biases. For example, early on after ChatGPT was released I found it had an extremely strong taboo against eating dolphin meat, to the extent that it was easier to get it to write about about eating human meat than dolphin meat. I have no idea where this could have come from but my guess is someone really hated the idea and spent all day flagging dolphin meat responses as bad.
Anyway, this is another, more subtle way more subtle issue with LLMs- they don’t simply respond with the statistically most likely outcome of a conversation, there is a finger in the scales in favor of certain responses, and that finger can be biased in ways that are not only due to human opinion, but also really hard to predict.
Eyron@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
Combined with prompt bias. Is “medical specialist” an actual job?