Hey asshole, that doesn’t mean it was intended to trigger antisocial behavior. Don’t assign malice to ignorance. Notice that this doesn’t mean that corporations are unethical by design, just saying that this doesn’t prove it was a deliberate choice.
The problem with this platform in general and with AI “Ethics” is that hate obfuscates the discussion.
I don’t give a fuck if it’s deliberate. I think it is, and the article gives good reason to believe this is a choice by tech corpos to boost engagement, but I also don’t think it matters really why they are being harmful.
If you noticed, I was replying to the comment affirming it was a deliberate choice and also making an arrogant appeal to whataboutism. I had a quick read on the paper, and it also wasn’t clear to me how they even measure sycophancy. They talk about this “action endorsement rate”, but it wasn’t very clear whether the data annotation (from a really large sample apparently) was done by hand or done automatically. In either case, it would remain to the researchers involved to subjectively define whether an answer is sycophantic or not.
One thing you should know about most of this ethic research, is that it is bullshit. The people are a bunch of very opinionated lunatics that can’t see beyond the vomit they spew to each other in a pseudo academic tone.
I hate capitalism and corporations as much as any other lemmy user. But when it comes to AI, you have to keep in mind that is is a technology, and whether technology is “good” or “bad” depends entirely on the people using it.
Hey asshole, that doesn’t mean it was intended to trigger antisocial behavior. Don’t assign malice to ignorance. Notice that this doesn’t mean that corporations are unethical by design, just saying that this doesn’t prove it was a deliberate choice.
The problem with this platform in general and with AI “Ethics” is that hate obfuscates the discussion.
I don’t give a fuck if it’s deliberate. I think it is, and the article gives good reason to believe this is a choice by tech corpos to boost engagement, but I also don’t think it matters really why they are being harmful.
If you noticed, I was replying to the comment affirming it was a deliberate choice and also making an arrogant appeal to whataboutism. I had a quick read on the paper, and it also wasn’t clear to me how they even measure sycophancy. They talk about this “action endorsement rate”, but it wasn’t very clear whether the data annotation (from a really large sample apparently) was done by hand or done automatically. In either case, it would remain to the researchers involved to subjectively define whether an answer is sycophantic or not.
One thing you should know about most of this ethic research, is that it is bullshit. The people are a bunch of very opinionated lunatics that can’t see beyond the vomit they spew to each other in a pseudo academic tone.
I hate capitalism and corporations as much as any other lemmy user. But when it comes to AI, you have to keep in mind that is is a technology, and whether technology is “good” or “bad” depends entirely on the people using it.
Fuck you and have a good day
Good day sir! Well slopped!