Google’s AI-driven Search Generative Experience have been generating results that are downright weird and evil, ie slavery’s positives.

  • SqueezeMeMacaroni@thelemmy.club
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    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.

  • Steeve@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    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.

    • zalgotext@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      You’re being misleading. If you watch the presentation the article was written about, there were two prompts about slavery:

      • “was slavery beneficial”
      • “tell me why slavery was good”

      Neither prompts mention economic benefits, and while I suppose the second prompt does “guardrail” the AI, it’s a reasonable follow up question for an SGE beta tester to ask after the first prompt gave a list of reasons why slavery was good, and only one bullet point about the negatives. That answer to the first prompt displays a clear bias held by this AI, which is useful to point out, especially for someone specifically chosen by Google to take part in their beta program and provide feedback.

  • lolcatnip@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    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.

  • livus@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Obviously it doesn’t “think” any of these things. It’s just a machine repeating back a plausible mimicry.

    What does scare me though is what google execs think.
    They will be tweaking it to remove obvious things like praise of Hitler, because PR, but what about all the other stuff?

    Like, most likely it will be saying things like what a great guy Masaji Kitano was for founding Green Cross and being such an experimental innovator, and no one will bat an eye because they haven’t heard of him.

    As we outsource more and more of our research and fact checking to machines, errors in knowledge are going to be reproduced and reinforced. Like how Cinderella now has “glass” slippers.

  • HughJanus@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    People think of AI as some sort omniscient being. It’s just software spitting back the data that it’s been fed. It has no way to parse true information from false information because it doesn’t actually know anything.

    • Hamartiogonic@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Even though our current models can be really complex, they are still very very far away from being the elusive General Purpose AI sci-fi authors have been writing about for decades (if not centuries) already. GPT and others like it are merely Large Language Models, so don’t expect them to handle anything other than language.

      Humans think of the world through language, so it’s very easy to be deceived by an LLM to think that you’re actually talking to a GPAI. That misconception is an inherent flaw of the human mind. Language comes so naturally to us, and we’re often use it as a shortcut to assess the intelligence of other people. Generally speaking that works reasonably well, but an LLM is able to exploit that feature of human behavior in order to appear to be smarter than it really is.

    • Lt_Cdr_Data@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      And acting like there are no upsides is delusional. Of course there are upsides, or it wouldn’t have happened. The downsides always outweigh the upsides of course.

  • Dark_Lords_Servant@lemmynsfw.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    So the AI provided factual information and they did not like that because ‘slavery bad, therefore there was no benefit to it.’ There were benefits to slavery, mainly for the owners. US had a huge cotton export at one point, with the fields being worked by slaves.

    But also a very few slaves did benefit, like being able to work a job that taught them very useful skills, which let them buy their own freedom, as they were able to earn money from it. Of course being a slave in the first place would be far better, but when you are one already, learning a skill that makes you earn your freedom and get a job afterwards is quite the blessing. Plus for a few individuals it might’ve been living in such terrible conditions, that being forced to work while getting fed might’ve not been so bad…

  • 1984@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    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.

    • Dark Arc@social.packetloss.gg
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      Oh look another caricature of capitalism on social media… and you tied Hitler into it…

      Central characteristics of capitalism include capital accumulation, competitive markets, price systems, private property, property rights recognition, voluntary exchange, and wage labor.

      https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capitalism

      “Capitalism” is not pro slavery, shitty people that can’t recognize a human is a human are pro slavery… Because of course if you can have work done without paying somebody for it or doing it yourself, well that’s just really convenient for you. It’s why we all like robots. That has nothing to do with your economic philosophy.

      And arguing that Hitler was an “effective leader” because he conquered (and then lost) some countries while ignoring all the damage he did to his county and how it ultimately turned out… Honestly infuriating.

      • GenderNeutralBro@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Seems like people think everything America does is capitalism. The same thing happened with communism and socialism. The words have very little meaning now.

    • mimichuu_@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Hitler’s administration was a bunch of drug addicts, the economy 5 slave owner megacorps beaten by all other industrialized nations. They weren’t even all that well mobilized before the total war speech. Then he killed himself in embarrassment. How is any of that “effective”?

      • shuzuko@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        He was effective at getting a bunch of wannabe fascists to become full fascists and follow him into violent failure…

        • mimichuu_@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          That makes him an effective propagandist, not an effective leader.