Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • World
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Brite
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (Cyborg)
  • No Skin
Collapse
Brand Logo

CIRCLE WITH A DOT

  1. Home
  2. Uncategorized
  3. The remarks from the expert in this article, even as critical as they are, grossly understate just how foolish and messed up this is.

The remarks from the expert in this article, even as critical as they are, grossly understate just how foolish and messed up this is.

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Uncategorized
39 Posts 25 Posters 0 Views
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • drwho@masto.hackers.townD drwho@masto.hackers.town

    @inthehands Can I quote you on that?

    inthehands@hachyderm.ioI This user is from outside of this forum
    inthehands@hachyderm.ioI This user is from outside of this forum
    inthehands@hachyderm.io
    wrote last edited by
    #29

    @drwho
    Any time

    drwho@masto.hackers.townD 1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • inthehands@hachyderm.ioI inthehands@hachyderm.io

      @drwho
      Any time

      drwho@masto.hackers.townD This user is from outside of this forum
      drwho@masto.hackers.townD This user is from outside of this forum
      drwho@masto.hackers.town
      wrote last edited by
      #30

      @inthehands Thank you kindly.

      1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • inthehands@hachyderm.ioI inthehands@hachyderm.io

        RE: https://flipboard.com/@futurism/futurism-1lupih3cz/-/a-hWRkyR9zQFuooBpWKGziAw%3Aa%3A1737388686-%2F0

        The remarks from the expert in this article, even as critical as they are, grossly understate just how foolish and messed up this is.

        “We didn’t conduct a poll, we just asked GPT or whatever to make up things people would say and then sampled that”

        My dudes. No.

        jbayes@sfba.socialJ This user is from outside of this forum
        jbayes@sfba.socialJ This user is from outside of this forum
        jbayes@sfba.social
        wrote last edited by
        #31

        @inthehands This is just a fancy new way of making shit up.

        Publishing fabricated polls as if they were legit, is called "fraud".

        1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • inthehands@hachyderm.ioI inthehands@hachyderm.io

          OK, I looked at it in slightly more detail, and yes, my OP is basically a correct summary of what they’re doing.

          Statistical Jesus wept.

          nosword@localization.cafeN This user is from outside of this forum
          nosword@localization.cafeN This user is from outside of this forum
          nosword@localization.cafe
          wrote last edited by
          #32

          @inthehands And not just statistics! I’ve also seen certain linguists and philosophers excited about the possibility of posing grammatical/ethical judgments to LLMs in bulk, apparently fully convinced that the results would hold any meaning or value whatsoever. Can’t wait for the smug “Trolley problem objectively solved” papers

          1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • inthehands@hachyderm.ioI inthehands@hachyderm.io

            OK, I looked at it in slightly more detail, and yes, my OP is basically a correct summary of what they’re doing.

            Statistical Jesus wept.

            jwz@mastodon.socialJ This user is from outside of this forum
            jwz@mastodon.socialJ This user is from outside of this forum
            jwz@mastodon.social
            wrote last edited by
            #33

            @inthehands 97.5% of Jesuses wept, +/- 2%.

            1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • inthehands@hachyderm.ioI inthehands@hachyderm.io

              Say what you will about predicting the future from animal entrails, but at least that can give you dinner

              sibylle@troet.cafeS This user is from outside of this forum
              sibylle@troet.cafeS This user is from outside of this forum
              sibylle@troet.cafe
              wrote last edited by
              #34

              @inthehands I prefer not to dissect animals to do my personal share of fortune telling.
              Observing the flight of birds does not harm the environment and the analysis of it has the accuracy and potential of what is stored in my subconcius and my own filter of values.

              And I'm serious. I whatch birds fly and ask myself, what does it tell me.

              And at no point I doubt that this is less accurate than asking an llm.

              I have to decide things anyways somehow to do what seems right to me.

              1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • inthehands@hachyderm.ioI inthehands@hachyderm.io

                (The underlying logic here is that LLMs embed biases, so you take advantage of that fact by prompting an LLM to take on a spectrum of different demographic biases that correspond to population demographics, then ask the LLM a polling question in the context of each of those demographically weighted biases.

                So yeah, from my OP it might sound like they’re replacing polling with stabbing themselves in the face, but •actually• they’re juggling a bunch of knives and •then• stabbing themselves in the face.)

                cinebox@masto.hackers.townC This user is from outside of this forum
                cinebox@masto.hackers.townC This user is from outside of this forum
                cinebox@masto.hackers.town
                wrote last edited by
                #35

                @inthehands there is no logic here. These people are just cultists.

                from the Aaru about page: “Some of us are existentialists. Some of us believe we live in a simulation and it is our goal to prove it. All of us see our products as puzzle pieces to building whole world simulation.”

                1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • gnate@ohai.socialG gnate@ohai.social

                  @rjblaskiewicz @inthehands
                  It's just offal.

                  msbellows@c.imM This user is from outside of this forum
                  msbellows@c.imM This user is from outside of this forum
                  msbellows@c.im
                  wrote last edited by
                  #36

                  @gnate @rjblaskiewicz @inthehands Entrail-based fortunetelling gets more complicated if the chicken ate tea leaves before it died.

                  1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • inthehands@hachyderm.ioI inthehands@hachyderm.io

                    RE: https://flipboard.com/@futurism/futurism-1lupih3cz/-/a-hWRkyR9zQFuooBpWKGziAw%3Aa%3A1737388686-%2F0

                    The remarks from the expert in this article, even as critical as they are, grossly understate just how foolish and messed up this is.

                    “We didn’t conduct a poll, we just asked GPT or whatever to make up things people would say and then sampled that”

                    My dudes. No.

                    npars01@mstdn.socialN This user is from outside of this forum
                    npars01@mstdn.socialN This user is from outside of this forum
                    npars01@mstdn.social
                    wrote last edited by
                    #37

                    @inthehands

                    It took Koch Network decades to achieve "corporate personhood" with Citizens United.

                    Link Preview Image
                    If Corporations Are People, They Should Act Like It

                    Companies deserve many of the same rights as citizens, but must also shoulder the same responsibilities.

                    favicon

                    The Atlantic (www.theatlantic.com)

                    Just a moment...

                    favicon

                    (inthesetimes.com)

                    Link Preview Image
                    When Did Companies Become People? Excavating The Legal Evolution

                    The Supreme Court has been granting more rights to corporations, including some regarded as those solely for individuals. But Nina Totenberg finds the company-to-person shift has a long history.

                    favicon

                    NPR (www.npr.org)

                    Corporations can outvote real people.

                    What happens when "AI personhood" is achieved & also outvotes real people?

                    Link Preview Image
                    It’s time to prepare for AI personhood | Jacy Reese Anthis

                    Technological advances will bring social upheaval. How will we treat digital minds, and how will they treat us?

                    favicon

                    the Guardian (www.theguardian.com)

                    Link Preview Image
                    Taking the "AI Personhood" Debate Seriously

                    Does this GPU have a soul?

                    favicon

                    (daveshap.substack.com)

                    What happens when fake AI voters are purchased in bulk by Putin?
                    https://medium.com/intuitionmachine/the-dangers-of-artificial-intelligence-is-unavoidable-due-to-flaws-of-human-civilization-f9c131e65e5e

                    What happens when women, Immigrants, POC, & LGBTQ become non-people?

                    1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • inthehands@hachyderm.ioI inthehands@hachyderm.io

                      (The underlying logic here is that LLMs embed biases, so you take advantage of that fact by prompting an LLM to take on a spectrum of different demographic biases that correspond to population demographics, then ask the LLM a polling question in the context of each of those demographically weighted biases.

                      So yeah, from my OP it might sound like they’re replacing polling with stabbing themselves in the face, but •actually• they’re juggling a bunch of knives and •then• stabbing themselves in the face.)

                      crystalvisits@mas.wrong.toolsC This user is from outside of this forum
                      crystalvisits@mas.wrong.toolsC This user is from outside of this forum
                      crystalvisits@mas.wrong.tools
                      wrote last edited by
                      #38

                      THANK you. @inthehands I have been arguing with a classmate for weeks about them using "synthetic" data for transportation class. Ugh. I know I get a little incoherent with anger about AI stuff, but I do not think we should be doing statistical analysis of made-up data. We can have actual data, if we just do a little work to get it. UGH.

                      1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      • inthehands@hachyderm.ioI inthehands@hachyderm.io

                        RE: https://flipboard.com/@futurism/futurism-1lupih3cz/-/a-hWRkyR9zQFuooBpWKGziAw%3Aa%3A1737388686-%2F0

                        The remarks from the expert in this article, even as critical as they are, grossly understate just how foolish and messed up this is.

                        “We didn’t conduct a poll, we just asked GPT or whatever to make up things people would say and then sampled that”

                        My dudes. No.

                        O This user is from outside of this forum
                        O This user is from outside of this forum
                        ocktoboy14@mastodon.social
                        wrote last edited by
                        #39

                        @inthehands fair point, this is likely a case of AI slop (and questionable marketing)!

                        But "obviously a terrible alternative"? As far as I'm concerned it sounds like a pretty reasonable thing to try.

                        And, It might even work quite well, but only for an LLM trained without RLHF, instruction tuning, and big tech putting their hands on it. The bias there would be from the data distribution (same problem they have in the old method, "who picks up the phone?")

                        1 Reply Last reply
                        0
                        • R relay@relay.mycrowd.ca shared this topic
                        Reply
                        • Reply as topic
                        Log in to reply
                        • Oldest to Newest
                        • Newest to Oldest
                        • Most Votes


                        • Login

                        • Login or register to search.
                        • First post
                          Last post
                        0
                        • Categories
                        • Recent
                        • Tags
                        • Popular
                        • World
                        • Users
                        • Groups