1,762 karma · joined December 1, 2022
> complaints on humor subreddits about how people repeatedly post copies of the same jokes, often without attribution
This feels like a reflection of what the person feels posting on the internet signifies. Are you publishing something, and thus you should attribute sources etc, or are you just having a conversation?
You would never attribute sources when making a joke in real life. I guess you could but it would be a pretty dorky thing to do.
> […] AI) as a viable replacement for the status quo.
Given that the status quo is clearly biased and structurally unwilling to be unbiased due to existing political affiliation, even an AI that is not evaluated all that well will be better. It can only get better from this status quo, so it’s a fine argument.
> Saying "there very likely […]
What’s with this nitpicky stuff. A simple google search shows there’s tons of research in LLM political bias evaluation.
> There is no guarantee [..] path to eliminating it?
It’s research. Sure there’s no guarantee but given progress in LLM, I would be optimistic rather than pessimistic.
For humans, there is no such guarantee. The humans can lie, change their mind, etc. See Wikipedia, where they talk about how they are not biased, they have many processes that ensure no biases, blah blah blah, and it turns out they are massively biased, what a surprise.
Of course, who evaluates the evaluators/evaluation frameworks comes into play but that's a much easier problem.
About Wikipedia, there is obvious bias and cliques there as has been discussed in this thread and HN for many years, not to mention the its bias is reason that Grokipedia came about in the first place.