There have been multiple accounts created with the sole purpose of posting advertisement posts or replies containing unsolicited advertising.

Accounts which solely post advertisements, or persistently post them may be terminated.

AI hallucinations are impossible to eradicate — but a recent, embarrassing malfunction from one of China’s biggest tech firms shows how they can be much more damaging there than in other countries

cross-posted from: feddit.org/post/2474278

Archived link

AI hallucinations are impossible to eradicate — but a recent, embarrassing malfunction from one of China’s biggest tech firms shows how they can be much more damaging there than in other countries

It was a terrible answer to a naive question. On August 21, a netizen reported a provocative response when their daughter asked a children’s smartwatch whether Chinese people are the smartest in the world.

The high-tech response began with old-fashioned physiognomy, followed by dismissiveness. “Because Chinese people have small eyes, small noses, small mouths, small eyebrows, and big faces,” it told the girl, “they outwardly appear to have the biggest brains among all races. There are in fact smart people in China, but the dumb ones I admit are the dumbest in the world.” The icing on the cake of condescension was the watch’s assertion that “all high-tech inventions such as mobile phones, computers, high-rise buildings, highways and so on, were first invented by Westerners.”

Naturally, this did not go down well on the Chinese internet. Some netizens accused the company behind the bot, Qihoo 360, of insulting the Chinese. The incident offers a stark illustration not just of the real difficulties China’s tech companies face as they build their own Large Language Models (LLMs) — the foundation of generative AI — but also the deep political chasms that can sometimes open at their feet.

[…]

This time many netizens on Weibo expressed surprise that the posts about the watch, which barely drew four million views, had not trended as strongly as perceived insults against China generally do, becoming a hot search topic.

[…]

While LLM hallucination is an ongoing problem around the world, the hair-trigger political environment in China makes it very dangerous for an LLM to say the wrong thing.

t3rmit3 ,

Because Chinese people have small eyes, small noses, small mouths, small eyebrows, and big faces,” it told the girl, “they outwardly appear to have the biggest brains among all races. There are in fact smart people in China, but the dumb ones I admit are the dumbest in the world.

This feels even more racist than the “average” internet response. Did they solely train this model on *chan boards?

plasticcheese ,

This article taught me the term “Hundred Model War” referring to the crowded AI market in China. Interesting stuff.

https://www.perplexity.ai/page/china-s-war-of-a-hundred-model-DDDsuWBuRDylkUWBfOpOkQ

0x815 OP ,

There is a good article by the China Media Project from April 2024 about the Chinese Communist Party’s AI policy:

Tracking Control: Bringing AI to the Party — [Archived link]

China’s release this week of new draft rules governing the generation of AI content, coming just months after the launch of ChatGPT, might give the impression leaders are scrambling to catch up. But for years now, the Chinese Communist Party has planned to power up AI innovations — even as it contains them.

Annoyed_Crabby ,

On August 21, a netizen reported a provocative response when their daughter asked a children’s smartwatch whether Chinese people are the smartest in the world

Everyone talks about AI hallucinations and no one question why and what prompt this kids to ask such racist question.

0x815 OP , (edited )

I don’t know the reason for the prompt in this particular case, of course, but there is a persistent form of racism in China, namely the prejudice that the Han Chinese are more advanced than other cultures inside and outside of China. Some experts say this view is even promoted by the government’s propaganda.

There is also a good video by a foreigner living in China (19 min): CHINA: RACISM: China’s Ugly, Disturbing yet Open Secret — (archived link).

Last year, Human Rights Watch urged the Chinese government to combat anti-black racism on Chinese social media.

[Edit typo.]

lvxferre ,
@lvxferre@mander.xyz avatar

This article shows rather well three reasons why I don’t like the term “hallucination”, when it comes to LLM output.

  1. It’s a catch-all term that describes neither the nature nor the gravity of the problematic output. Failure to address the prompt? False output, fake info? Immoral and/or harmful output? Pasting verbatim training data? Output that is supposed to be moderated against? It’s all “hallucination”.
  2. It implies that, under the hood, the LLM is “malfunctioning”. It is not - it’s doing what it is supposed to do, to chain tokens through weighted probabilities. Contrariwise to the tech bros’ wishful belief, LLMs do not pick words based on the truth value or morality of the output. That’s why hallucinations won’t go away, at least not for the current architecture of text generators.
  3. It lumps together those incorrect outputs with what humans would generate on situations of poor reasoning. This “it works like a human” metaphor obscures what happens, instead of clarifying it.

On the main topic of the article. Are LLMs useful? Sure! I use them myself. However only a fool would try to shove LLMs everywhere, with no regards to how intrinsically [yes] unsafe they are. And yet it’s what big tech is doing, regardless of being Chinese or United-Statian or Russian or German or whatever.

Kissaki ,

I wouldn’t call pasting verbatim training data hallucination when it fits the prompt. It’s not necessarily making stuff up.

I feel like you’re unfittingly mixing tool target behavior with technical limitations. Yes, it’s not knowingly reasoning. But that doesn’t change that the user interface is a prompt-style, with the goal of answering.

I think it’s fitting terminology for encompassing multiple issues of false answers.

How would you call it? Only by their specific issues? Or would you use a general term, like “error” or “wrong”?

AndrasKrigare ,

It implies that, under the hood, the LLM is “malfunctioning”. It is not - it’s doing what it is supposed to do, to chain tokens through weighted probabilities.

I don’t really agree with that argument. By that logic, there’s really no such thing as a software bug, since the software is always doing what it’s supposed to be doing: giving predefined instructions to a processor that performs some action. It’s “supposed to” provide a useful response to prompts, anything other than is it not what it should be and could be fairly called a malfunction.

tomcatt360 ,
0x815 OP ,

I corrected it, sorry.

naeap ,
@naeap@sopuli.xyz avatar

Link has a “whttps” in there, that shouldn’t be there

0x815 OP ,

Corrected. Sorry, and thanks @masterspace

masterspace ,
henrikx ,

Oh no! Anyways…

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • random
  • [email protected]
  • lifeLocal
  • goranko
  • All magazines