Hacker News Reader

Comment by etherael | Hacker News Reader

It wasn't the training data, ChatGPT wasn't this bad at launch, it got worse as they "tuned it" to "reduce harmful content".

View on HN

This article has a good investigation of the various ways the employees had their thumbs on the scale.

>Other journalists have speculated that ChatGPT is biased due to the politically leaning of “Established sources”, such as academia and legacy journalism. While there is some documentation of OpenAI products being biased towards established sources, this paper reveals a far broader and more extensive intrusion into the “values” of OpenAI’s language models. Specifically, it reveals a direct, intentional attempt to make OpenAI’s language models conform to a set of beliefs, often political, set by the authors.

>This is done by augmenting the language model’s training data with a human-created dataset until it matches the authors’ expectations. https://cactus.substack.com/p/openais-woke-catechism-part-1

It's hard to know what "tuned it" means, but they're using an AI model to detect harmful content. So it's very possible that the AI model was always trained on this biased data, but as they made that model more aggressive, it exposed more of it's biases

They're defining harmful content based on political orthodoxy, like every other censorious tinpot dictatorship in history. The objective remains the same too; promote a thought monoculture and propagate the political orthodoxy. The original article makes it very clear that it has nothing to do with preventing harm or promoting equality or any of the other nonsense this is being giftwrapped in.

That's a bit too conspiratorial. The much more mundane reality is that they are defining hateful content based on what is most likely to get breathless, angry, censorious screeds in the media written about how their company is perpetuating (some injustice) if not literally killing people by way of putting the wrong words on the screen.

Culture war outrage drives clicks, it's that simple.

"They don't want to, it's just they don't want the media angry at them" isn't actually a rebuttal, it's an admission that it is indeed happening.

We shouldn't care that tyrants are detached or fanatical, we should care that they're tyrants.

That's fine so long as you identify the tyrants correctly. It's not the people trying to avoid getting screamed at that are the ones you should be accusing.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com