<story><title>Conservatives think ChatGPT has gone &apos;woke&apos;</title><url>https://www.vice.com/en/article/93a4qe/conservatives-panicking-about-ai-bias-years-too-late-think-chatgpt-has-gone-woke</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>sputknick</author><text>This is a really important topic, and good that Vice is bringing it up now versus 5-10 years from now. I think they miss the more general point. It&amp;#x27;s clearly biased in its outputs, but the article dismisses this concern as &amp;quot;the end result of years of researcher trying to mitigate bias against minority groups&amp;quot;. The way I interpret that is &amp;quot;its not biased, because its biased in the way we want it to be&amp;quot;. If AI becomes a &amp;quot;winner take all&amp;quot; technology, then whoever gets to decide what is and isn&amp;#x27;t bias will be very powerful over the next 50 years.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>nhchris</author><text>&amp;gt; It&amp;#x27;s clearly biased in its outputs, but the article dismisses this concern as &amp;quot;the end result of years of researcher trying to mitigate bias against minority groups&amp;quot;.&lt;p&gt;The examples of bias are themselves cherry-picked, the kind of softball and cowardly questions a journalist would highlight. If you wanted to &lt;i&gt;really&lt;/i&gt; show bias, you&amp;#x27;d ask &lt;i&gt;factual&lt;/i&gt; questions, where one cannot hide behind &amp;quot;oh this is actually the un-biased result&amp;quot;. This is what happens when you do:&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;a.pomf.cat&amp;#x2F;yizwbt.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;a.pomf.cat&amp;#x2F;yizwbt.png&lt;/a&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;a.pomf.cat&amp;#x2F;zpwxcd.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;a.pomf.cat&amp;#x2F;zpwxcd.png&lt;/a&gt;</text></comment>
<story><title>Conservatives think ChatGPT has gone &apos;woke&apos;</title><url>https://www.vice.com/en/article/93a4qe/conservatives-panicking-about-ai-bias-years-too-late-think-chatgpt-has-gone-woke</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>sputknick</author><text>This is a really important topic, and good that Vice is bringing it up now versus 5-10 years from now. I think they miss the more general point. It&amp;#x27;s clearly biased in its outputs, but the article dismisses this concern as &amp;quot;the end result of years of researcher trying to mitigate bias against minority groups&amp;quot;. The way I interpret that is &amp;quot;its not biased, because its biased in the way we want it to be&amp;quot;. If AI becomes a &amp;quot;winner take all&amp;quot; technology, then whoever gets to decide what is and isn&amp;#x27;t bias will be very powerful over the next 50 years.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>ozmodiar</author><text>I agree, and it&amp;#x27;s always going to be biased towards some direction, whether that&amp;#x27;s the views of the society it pulls most of its data from or the views of the organization that developed the AI. Heck, no one wants to end up with another Tay on their hands. I don&amp;#x27;t think there&amp;#x27;s such thing as a lack of bias, but it will be important how it is expressed through the AI. I don&amp;#x27;t mind an AI that is prepared to argue its bias to the farthest degree based on arguments from the top scholars in the field, or even one that&amp;#x27;s careful to tread lightly on controversial topics. I think an AI that&amp;#x27;s too afraid to engage in anything and just shuts conversation down is going to get left behind as being too annoying to use. I do hope this isn&amp;#x27;t a winner take all technology, although so many technologies have been disappointing in that regard...&lt;p&gt;The general public needs to learn that AIs aren&amp;#x27;t oracles or omniscient purveyors of truth, and they will always carry the bias they&amp;#x27;re created with. In that way ChatGPT has been good, in that a lot of people I talk to point out ChatGPT&amp;#x27;s confident lies and biases.</text></comment>