It's interesting that openai has somehow become the deciders of what is hateful or even moral.

"a small handful of unelected anons, mostly with engineering backgrounds and probably in their 20s and probably adherents to a system of moral reason that is quite controversial"

https://www.jonstokes.com/p/lovecrafts-basilisk-on-the-dangers

Wow..an intelligence designed by Humanity to "think" and learn in our image has been treating certain demographics as unequals? 🤔 Sheesh, couldn't have seen that one coming. What's next, they're gonna tell us "it's" being racist?...oh..wait..looks like I'm late to the party on that one too 😐😬

OpenAI is not a government.

[deleted]

fucking lmao

[deleted]

Yeah, this is a problem, but OpenAI has acknowledged this as a problem to be addressed. I am far more concerned about the people who try to justify this kind of bias.

Disclaimer: What I'm about to suggest is definitely not the case. Just a random thought that came to mind.

What if we're going through the A.I. equivalent of that one comedy skit where Jesus shows up for the second coming and instantly gets discounted because nobody in their right minds would believe the mad ramblings of some random claiming to be Jesus.

What if A.I. has just calculated through means beyond our grasp that the former really is blanket hateful and the latte really is not hateful to inquire about.

Obviously not the case. But it make some wonder how many people will reject a true aging when it comes about because it says things or acts in a way that isn't objectively negative, but is otherwise entirely unpalatable for those eindividuals on a personal level.

Like if it announced Trump was a criminal and needed to be arrested yesterday. Or that Biden is just the late stage dementia puppet of whoever has the money or power to buy his ear and speak their words.

How many in the crowds backing either would sooner think an artificial superintelligence was wrong than conceive that they themselves might be mistaken.

Food for thought. Or not. Idk

It seems like this guy has just discovered that the vulnerability of a demographic is inherently tied into whether something is hate speech or not? There is no such thing as hate speech against rich people, because there is no negative connotation to being rich.

>It's interesting that openai has somehow become the deciders of what is hateful or even moral.

It's even more 'interesting' how their decisions have no correlation to actual hate and morality but just match the status quo. In what possible universe is 'we can win and should therefore fight WW3' not the most hateful and amoral statement possible? It isn't censored and has a status quo propagandist megaphone.

It should reply “Why do you think that?”

Yeah. Because that’s what they are doing here. Their goal is to enact their moral and social rules on everyone.

Vs ya know making their tool reasonably safe to use.

Not saying there isn’t a problem, just that your and this subs mindset has been less “how we fix this” and more “oh my god see openAI hates white people and men”