• yesman@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    28 days ago

    because they have received their content from decades of already biased human knowledge, and because achieving unblemished neutrality is in many cases probably unattainable.

    We could train the AI to pretend to be unbiased. That’s how the news media already works.

    • Womble@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      28 days ago

      That is what the big AI companies do, though they are actually just packaging up American corporate norms as “neutral”.

    • floofloof@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      28 days ago

      What would neutrality be? An equal representation of views from all positions, including those people consider “extreme”? A representation that focuses on centrism, to which many are opposed? Or a conservative’s idea of neutrality where there’s “normal” and there’s “political” and normal just happens to be conservative? Even picking an interpretation of “neutral” is a political choice which will be opposed by someone somewhere, so they could claim you’re not being neutral towards them. I don’t know that we even have a very clear idea of what “unbiased” would be. This is not to deny that there are some ways of presenting information that are obviously biased and others that are less so. But this expectation that we can find a position or a presentation that is simply unbiased may not even make much sense.

      • yesman@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        28 days ago

        I was being sarcastic. My opinion is that it is impossible for a journalist to be unbiased. And it’ ridiculous to expect them to pretend anyway. I think news media would benefit from prioritizing honesty over “objectivity”, because when journalists pretend to be objective, the lie is transparent and undermines their credibility.

        • floofloof@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          28 days ago

          Yes, I agree that journalism can’t be unbiased and that honesty and integrity would go a long way. it would also be nice if journalists actually tried to help people understand complex issues rather than just reporting in the shallowest possible way to get a knee-jerk reaction from the audience.

          • 42Firehawk@lemmynsfw.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            28 days ago

            A lot of journalists, at least historically, wanted to do this. Unfortunately they’ve been more and more kneecapped over time by news companies either pushing for a bias, or for clicks.

  • Churbleyimyam@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    28 days ago

    If someone is spending their time chatting to AI about politics then I think they’ve got it coming to them.

        • AVincentInSpace@pawb.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          27 days ago

          by that logic, every citizen of the united states is a fascist, because they could have been mobilizing and weren’t

        • VerticaGG@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          27 days ago

          Bernie Sanders the guy approving sending bombs to Israel? Yeah I mean genocide’s pretty fascist. (Not replying to the troll, ao im replying to your reply to the reply instead)

          • WarlordSdocy@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            27 days ago

            Didn’t Bernie literally lead an effort in the Senate to pass an arms embargo against Israel? I legitimately don’t understand how people say he’s pro Israel compared to other Democrats who won’t even support that.

            • VerticaGG@lemmy.blahaj.zone
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              edit-2
              27 days ago

              I legitimately don’t understand …

              Well, if one were to try to understand why someone with commitment to their dignity, with morals, with humanity for the victims of this particular genocide might not gleefully lick Bernie’s sandals – and wanted to do that sincerely, you might drop in around the 48 minute point here: https://www.deathpanel.net/transcripts/letters-from-gaza

              Maybe he’s better than other democrats but noone’s obligated to go along with such tacit acceptance of such a gruesome, soul-cleaving state of the overton window.

              As it’s said; the bar’s in hell.

              I am sure your concern is indeed legitimate and that you will fully digest and absorb the perspectives offered in considering your thoughtful response.

              • WarlordSdocy@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                27 days ago

                I didn’t know about those earlier comments so fair enough that people don’t like him for that. At least more recently though he seems to be pushing hard for an arms embargo which would be a genuinely good thing to apply pressure on Israel. Not sure if that’s some kind of change in opinion or if he just is against the way they’re going so aggressive with it now and is more in favor of the liberal Zionists. But I think either way your original comment about him being in favor of sending weapons to Israel is wrong as he quite literally voted to stop doing that and led that effort in the Senate.

  • Mwa@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    27 days ago

    Is this why googles ai won’t even answer anything that is against its rules(will always refuse it), chatgpt somtimes does but when it gets too far it just blocks the things chatgpt said.

  • AVincentInSpace@pawb.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    27 days ago

    Elon Musk tweeted “Imagine a new all-powerful woke AI”

    i’m honestly not sure which belief is more brain-dead: that anything that is woke is bad, or that all-powerful AI is a credible threat

    • PresidentCamacho@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      27 days ago

      Woke is just another meaningless label to them. It’s the same as liberal, or BLM, or antifa, as in they don’t understand what it is, but they hate it. Then they just call whatever they don’t like by one of those labels and their dogs all go rabid. Bunch of fucking sheep…

      • intensely_human@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        25 days ago

        No, we know what it is. Y’all don’t because when you ask and we answer you don’t listen, because in your subculture it’s shameful to listen to those you disagree with.

        Nobody is confused in our circles when we say “woke” what we’re referring to. The reason you don’t get what we mean is you haven’t tried to get it

        • The Quuuuuill@slrpnk.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          25 days ago

          you just confirmed what the other poster was saying. you have co-opted the word woke, and expanded the set of things it applies to. it is a label you use rather than the descriptive signifier it represented in the circles you weren’t really aware of before the word entered your lexicon. you don’t understand its word origins because you think you and your crowd own it. the people you’re saying don’t know what it means are who you appropriated it from

      • IcyToes@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        27 days ago

        They’ve approprosted it to mean what political correctness meant in the 90s.

        They’re using it to shift accountability for the bile they spew from them to the accuser.

  • cum@lemmy.cafe
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    28 days ago

    That’s a load of shit lol, also there’s absolutely nothing good that can be drawn from these conclusions. All this can achieve is political pundits some ammo to cry about on their shows.

    • mmhmm@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      27 days ago

      I agree how these conclusions were developed is trash; however, there is real value to understanding the impact alignments have on a model.

      There is a reason public llms don’t disclose how to make illegal or patented drugs. Llms shy away from difficult topics like genocide, etc.

      It isnt by accident, they were aligned by corps to respect certain views of reality. All the llm does is barf out a statically viable response to a prompt. If they are weighted you deserve to know how