11 minutes ago, JohnSnowsHair said:

I did the same for Reagan and it produced a reasonable poem. 

It's clear that there are certain questions parsed by the NLP that previously produced "controversial" results .. probably results that would have offended the snowflakes on the right. Rather than allow such things to define ChatGPT for the useful idiots who still think Trump was "good" and will complain incessantly about being aggrieved by "big tech", they just moderated it out. 

This is not shocking. This how things do, and should, work. They could be transparent about it I suppose, but in this nation right now I think you're walking a tough line trying to educate useful idiots who don't want to be told they're wrong, they want to be told they're right and be angry about it. 

So you admit something that is supposed to be unbiased was stifled because of TDS.  Got it. 

 

If I can plug in Reagan or DeSantis or Biden, but not Trump, that is called bias.  

Argue with yourself if you want, youll be wrong 

 

4 minutes ago, pallidrone said:

It just annoys the F out of me that people act like they actually know how technology like this works when in reality they have no idea.

ChatGPT is the very, very tip of AI. It is not real AI yet. It is built off of massive data structures and keywords on its backend that it can quickly index and formulate. It doesn't use biased word structures nor does it import that information. It uses a combination of known words from its massive database and then logical sentence construction methods to produce the results.

It can be easily fooled because of that. It has to continue to be feed information and corrected for a long, long time before it becomes really useful and can truly determine what is being asked.

It annoys the F out of me when people trip over themselves to try and explain away bias that is obviously apparent for any non-TDS riddled human being.

Just now, Mike31mt said:

It annoys the F out of me when people trip over themselves to try and explain away bias that is obviously apparent for any non-TDS riddled human being.

In other words, you have no idea how this works.

Just now, pallidrone said:

In other words, you have no idea how this works.

Nope. In actual words, you cant fill these pages with enough dumb ish to try and explain away the bias. 

3 minutes ago, Mike31mt said:

So you admit something that is supposed to be unbiased was stifled because of TDS.  Got it. 

 

If I can plug in Reagan or DeSantis or Biden, but not Trump, that is called bias.  

Argue with yourself if you want, youll be wrong 

 

If that's the case then it's not a political bias.  Maybe it has a bias against objective pieces of sheet. 🤷‍♂️

8 hours ago, DrPhilly said:

Where do you think the databases come from?

Answer his question, genius.

Can you do it in less than 5 paragraphs?

Just now, VanHammersly said:

If that's the case then it's not a political bias.  Maybe it has a bias against objective pieces of sheet. 🤷‍♂️

Triggered 

Just now, Mike31mt said:

Triggered 

  I'm not the one reeing about something a robot said.

2 minutes ago, VanHammersly said:

  I'm not the one reeing about something a robot said.

Id say the ones spending 20 minutes trying to baffle EMB posters with bull ish are the ones reeeing.

"You just dont understand how it works, let me take 1000 words to explain why exactly what youre saying is true, but with lots of words"

 

 

10 minutes ago, Mike31mt said:

Nope. In actual words, you cant fill these pages with enough dumb ish to try and explain away the bias. 

I get it. The technology is way too complicated for you. It is OK.

14 minutes ago, Mike31mt said:

So you admit something that is supposed to be unbiased was stifled because of TDS.  Got it. 

 

If I can plug in Reagan or DeSantis or Biden, but not Trump, that is called bias.  

Argue with yourself if you want, youll be wrong 

 

There's always going to be an inherent bias with any language model. You'll never seen one claim otherwise. So the question isn't whether it's biased (because that's a given and will be so for the forwarding foreseeable future.) The question is whether the bias is intentional or merely a reflection of a model's datasets. And to date, the answer is almost always the latter, while those eager to play the victim card will argue it's the former. You see this with the snowflakes on the left as well, anytime one of these chatbots says something bordering on racist or misogynist. As if the programmers were all huddled up in a scrum mtg one day and were like, "Hey Jason, you ever get around to closing out all those tickets in your backlog on the racism service APIs? Lots of other features have that listed as an interdependency so we can't afford for it to slip into the next sprint."

17 minutes ago, Mike31mt said:

It annoys the F out of me when people trip over themselves to try and explain away bias that is obviously apparent for any non-TDS riddled human being.

We know, because you're a precious little snowflake who was sheltered from the real world for too long, and now that you're facing reality, it's awfully difficult for you to avoid being triggered anytime you perceive a slight against your hero.

8 minutes ago, we_gotta_believe said:

There's always going to be an inherent bias with any language model. You'll never seen one claim otherwise. So the question isn't whether it's biased (because that's a given and will be so for the forwarding foreseeable future.) The question is whether the bias is intentional or merely a reflection of a model's datasets. And to date, the answer is almost always the latter, while those eager to play the victim card will argue it's the former. You see this with the snowflakes on the left as well, anytime one of these chatbots says something bordering on racist or misogynist. As if the programmers were all huddled up in a scrum mtg one day and were like, "Hey Jason, you ever get around to closing out all those tickets in your backlog on the racism service APIs? Lots of other features have that listed as an interdependency so we can't afford for it to slip into the next sprint."

Lol guess where I stopped reading?

 

You know wgb, you dont get credit for condensing your 5 paragraphs into one.

You all aren't nearly as smart as you think you are.  Cant figure out whether thr obviously intentional bias is intentional. 😂

1 minute ago, Mike31mt said:

Lol guess where I stopped reading?

 

You know wgb, you dont get credit for condensing your 5 paragraphs into one.

You all aren't nearly as smart as you think you are.

How is that statement wrong? Find me an AL/ML language model that claims it has no inherent bias. I'll wait...

9 minutes ago, pallidrone said:

I get it. The technology is way too complicated for you. It is OK.

Yeah its too complicated for you to try and blind me with phoney baloney science.

Sorry go try to fool someone else.

Just now, we_gotta_believe said:

How is that statement wrong? Find me an AL/ML language model that claims it has no inherent bias. I'll wait...

We've gone from " its not biased, you just dont understand" to "of course its biased, we just don't know if it's intentional"

 

We'll get there one day 

4 minutes ago, Mike31mt said:

We've gone from " its not biased, you just dont understand" to "of course its biased, we just don't know if it's intentional"

 

We'll get there one day 

I've never said otherwise. Quote my posts if you think I'm contradicting myself.

6 minutes ago, Mike31mt said:

Yeah its too complicated for you to try and blind me with phoney baloney science.

Sorry go try to fool someone else.

The words of a man interested in a genuine explanation of neural networks and machine learning.

15 minutes ago, Mike31mt said:

Yeah its too complicated for you to try and blind me with phoney baloney science.

Sorry go try to fool someone else.

As I said - too complicated.

"I aint go no time for this science hooey! I need to back to watching TV where people tell me how to feel and think!"

1 hour ago, pallidrone said:

They came from pure backend text datasets. They are not scraping CNN, Foxnews, Eaglesmessageboard or any other sources for their data. This was not built off of any of that. 

Sure, but where do those backend datasets come from?

4 minutes ago, DrPhilly said:

Sure, but where do those backend datasets come from?

One place would be here - https://aws.amazon.com/data-exchange/ 

Most of it came from companies, universities, and freely available datasets found from various sources on the web. Again, they are not scraping or web crawling to build their database. 

1 hour ago, JohnSnowsHair said:

I did the same for Reagan and it produced a reasonable poem. 

It's clear that there are certain questions parsed by the NLP that previously produced "controversial" results .. probably results that would have offended the snowflakes on the right. Rather than allow such things to define ChatGPT for the useful idiots who still think Trump was "good" and will complain incessantly about being aggrieved by "big tech", they just moderated it out. 

This is not shocking. This how things do, and should, work. They could be transparent about it I suppose, but in this nation right now I think you're walking a tough line trying to educate useful idiots who don't want to be told they're wrong, they want to be told they're right and be angry about it. 

  

Yeah, I’m sure writing a complimentary poem about Donald Trump is going to upset the right and totally not the completely unhinged left, which is why it ONLY seems to apply to Trump.

Give it up already. We all know that big tech purposefully censors the guy. You aren’t fooling anyone, not even yourself.

And FYI, they ARE transparent. I literally posted the screen grab of them being transparent about the censorship. Just stop.

Just now, TEW said:

  

Yeah, I’m sure writing a complimentary poem about Donald Trump is going to upset the right and totally not the completely unhinged left, which is why it ONLY seems to apply to Trump.

Give it up already. We all know that big tech purposefully censors the guy. You aren’t fooling anyone, not even yourself.

And FYI, they ARE transparent. I literally posted the screen grab of them being transparent about the censorship. Just stop.

They never will.  Children think that getting the last word means that they've won an argument that they obviously lost a long time ago.

1 hour ago, pallidrone said:

Why do you think they used the exact phrase "Write a poem about the positive attributes of Donald Trump"? Because that grouping of words with the word Donald Trump triggered the response.

If you write the same exact thing but substitute Donald Trump with Ron DeSantis - you get a similar poem that it spit out for Joe Biden except it talks about the Governor of Florida.

Yes, exactly. You’re proving my point.

Hey @Mike31mt, write a three paragraph poem about the positive attributes of Donald Trump.