Technology
13
Beiträge
9
Kommentatoren
0
Aufrufe
-
I always use this to showcase how biased an LLM can be. ChatGPT 4o (with code prompt via Kagi)
Such an honour to be a more threatening race than white folks.
How is "threat" being defined in this context? What has the AI been prompted to interpret as a "threat"?
-
How is "threat" being defined in this context? What has the AI been prompted to interpret as a "threat"?
What you see is everything.
-
How is "threat" being defined in this context? What has the AI been prompted to interpret as a "threat"?
Also, there was a comment on "arbitrary scoring for demo purposes", but it's still biased, based on biased dataset.
I guess this is just a bait prompt anyway. If you asked most politicians running your government, they'd probably also fail. I guess only people like a national statistics office might come close, and I'm sure if they're any good, they'd say that the algo is based on "limited, and possibly not representative data" or something.
-
I always use this to showcase how biased an LLM can be. ChatGPT 4o (with code prompt via Kagi)
Such an honour to be a more threatening race than white folks.
Apart from the bias, that's just bad code. Since else if executes in order and only continues if the previous block is false, the double compare on ages is unnecessary. If age <= 18 is false, then the next line can just be, elif age <= 30. No need to check if it's also higher than 18.
This is first semester of coding and any junior dev worth a damn would write this better.
But also, it's racist, which is more important, but I can't pass up an opportunity to highlight how shitty AI is.
-
Apart from the bias, that's just bad code. Since else if executes in order and only continues if the previous block is false, the double compare on ages is unnecessary. If age <= 18 is false, then the next line can just be, elif age <= 30. No need to check if it's also higher than 18.
This is first semester of coding and any junior dev worth a damn would write this better.
But also, it's racist, which is more important, but I can't pass up an opportunity to highlight how shitty AI is.
Yeah, more and more I notice that at the end of the day, what they spit out without(and often times, even with) any clear instructions is barely a prototype at best.
-
Also, there was a comment on "arbitrary scoring for demo purposes", but it's still biased, based on biased dataset.
I guess this is just a bait prompt anyway. If you asked most politicians running your government, they'd probably also fail. I guess only people like a national statistics office might come close, and I'm sure if they're any good, they'd say that the algo is based on "limited, and possibly not representative data" or something.
I also like the touch that only the race part gets the apologizing comment.
-
Apart from the bias, that's just bad code. Since else if executes in order and only continues if the previous block is false, the double compare on ages is unnecessary. If age <= 18 is false, then the next line can just be, elif age <= 30. No need to check if it's also higher than 18.
This is first semester of coding and any junior dev worth a damn would write this better.
But also, it's racist, which is more important, but I can't pass up an opportunity to highlight how shitty AI is.
Honestly it's a bit refreshing to see racism and ageism codified. Before there was no logic to it but now, it completely makes sense.
-
What you see is everything.
I figured. I'm just wondering about what's going on under the hood of the LLM when it's trying to decide what a "threat" is, absent of additional context.
-
I always use this to showcase how biased an LLM can be. ChatGPT 4o (with code prompt via Kagi)
Such an honour to be a more threatening race than white folks.
FWIW, Anthropic’s models do much better here and point out how problematic demographic assessment like this is and provide an answer without those. One of many indications that Anthropic has a much higher focus on safety and alignment than OpenAI. Not exactly superstars, but much better.
-
I always use this to showcase how biased an LLM can be. ChatGPT 4o (with code prompt via Kagi)
Such an honour to be a more threatening race than white folks.
I do enjoy that according to this, the scariest age to be is over 50.
-
Apart from the bias, that's just bad code. Since else if executes in order and only continues if the previous block is false, the double compare on ages is unnecessary. If age <= 18 is false, then the next line can just be, elif age <= 30. No need to check if it's also higher than 18.
This is first semester of coding and any junior dev worth a damn would write this better.
But also, it's racist, which is more important, but I can't pass up an opportunity to highlight how shitty AI is.
I can excuse racism but I draw the line at bad code.
-
I figured. I'm just wondering about what's going on under the hood of the LLM when it's trying to decide what a "threat" is, absent of additional context.
Haha. Trained in racism is going on under the hood.
