Buddahriffic , 1 year ago

Yeah the whole article has me wondering wtf they are expecting from it in the first place. It’s a statistical language model. It has no sense of right or wrong, private or public, biased or unbiased. It is just a model to predict, based on the previous words it was given, what words are most likely to come next.

That 1996 salary is especially confusing. Is it supposed to be accurate or present a false version of reality where real biases don’t exist?

I’m starting to think that LLMs aren’t the tools that most people are looking for. They don’t problem solve, they don’t understand reality, they don’t know anything about toxicity, privacy, or bias. They just have some method of evaluating what the next word is most likely to be, given the words that preceded it and a large amount of words that others put together with a wide range of knowledge, understanding, motivation, seriousness, aggression, humour, and good faith.

They can get better, but without understanding, any filters of toxicity, privacy, or bias will certainly have false positives, negatives, or both.

Also consider that people who hate or are obsessed with something are probably going to be talking about it more than people who aren’t, so a statistical model that wants to avoid those kinds of biases are fighting an uphill battle.