Technology

I think this is an issue with people being offended by definitions. Slavery did “help” the economy. Was it right? No, but it did. Mexico’s drug problem helps that economy. Adolf Hitler was “effective” as a leader. He created a cultural identity for people that had none and mobilized them to a war. Ethical? Absolutely not. What he did was horrendous and the bit should include a caveat, but we need to be a little more understanding that it’s a computer; it will use the dictionary of the English language.

Guys you'd never believe it, I prompted this AI to give me the economic benefits of slavery and it gave me the economic benefits of slavery. Crazy shit.

Why do we need child-like guardrails for fucking everything? The people that wrote this article bowl with the bumpers on.

The basic problem with AI is that it can only learn from things it reads on the Internet, and the Internet is a dark place with a lot of racists.

If it’s only as good as the data it’s trained on, garbage in / garbage out, then in my opinion it’s “machine learning,” not “artificial intelligence.”

Intelligence has to include some critical, discriminating faculty. Not just pattern matching vomit.

If you ask an LLM for bullshit, it will give you bullshit. Anyone who is at all surprised by this needs to quit acting like they know what "AI" is, because they clearly don't.

You know unless we teach more critical thinking, AI is going to destroy us as a civilization in a few generations.

did they train it with ben shapiro speeches?

so it's a little bit conservative big deal

Slavery was great for the slave owners, so what's controversial about that?

And yes, of course it's economically awesome if people work without getting much money for it, again a huge plus for the bottom line of the companies.

Capitalism is evil against people, not the AI...

Hitler was also an effective leader, nobody can argue against that. How else could he conquer most of Europe? Effective is something that evil people can be also.

That women in the article being shocked by this simply expected the AI to remove Hitler from all included leaders because he was evil. She is surprised that an evil person is included in effective leaders and she wanted to be shielded from that and wasn't.

Wtf are people expecting from a fucking language model?

It literally just Mathematics you a awnser.

To repeat something another guy on lemmy said.

Making AI say slavery is good is the modern equivalent of writing BOOBS on a calculator.

"the X post"

lol

Articles about what some LLM wrote are just so stupid.

Sounds like the bot has been training on Florida public education and Prager U content.

There needs to be like an information campaign or something... The average person doesn't realize these things say what they think you want to hear, and they are buying into hype and think these things are magic knowledge machines that can tell you secrets you never imagined.

I mean, I get the people working on the LLMs want them to be magic knowledge machines, but it is really putting the cart before the horse to let people assume they already are, and the little warnings that some stuff at the bottom of the page are inadequate.

I mean it's how we got shoes phones and batteries for recent times.

This is the best summary I could come up with:

Not only has it been caught spitting out completely false information, but in another blow to the platform, people have now discovered it's been generating results that are downright evil.

Case in point, noted SEO expert Lily Ray discovered that the experimental feature will literally defend human slavery, listing economic reasons why the abhorrent practice was good, actually.

That enslaved people learned useful skills during bondage — which sounds suspiciously similar to Florida's reprehensible new educational standards.

The pros included the dubious point that carrying a gun signals you are a law-abiding citizen, which she characterized as a "matter of opinion," especially in light of legally obtained weapons being used in many mass shootings.

Imagine having these results fed to a gullible public — including children — en masse, if Google rolls the still-experimental feature out more broadly.

But how will any of these problems be fixed when the number of controversial topics seems to stretch into the horizon of the internet, filled with potentially erroneous information and slanted garbage?

The original article contains 450 words, the summary contains 170 words. Saved 62%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!