Technology

59282 readers

4199 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

Follow the lemmy.world rules.
Only tech related content.
Be excellent to each another!
Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
Politics threads may be removed.
No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

488

Google apologizes for ‘missing the mark’ after Gemini generated racially diverse Nazis (www.theverge.com)

submitted 8 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

198 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Google apologizes for ‘missing the mark’ after Gemini generated racially diverse Nazis::Google says it’s aware of historically inaccurate results for its Gemini AI image generator, following criticism that it depicted historically white groups as people of color.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 3 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Not human biases. Biases in the labeled data set.

Who made the data set? Dogs? Pigeons?

[–] [email protected] 5 points 8 months ago (1 children)

If you train on Shutterstock and end up with a bias towards smiling, is that a human bias, or a stock photography bias?

Data can be biased in a number of ways, that don't always reflect broader social biases, and even when they might appear to, the cause vs correlation regarding the parallel isn't necessarily straightforward.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I mean "taking pictures of people who are smiling" is definitely a bias in our culture. How we collectively choose to record information is part of how we encode human biases.

I get what you're saying in specific circumstances. Sure, a dataset that is built from a single source doesn't make its biases universal. But these models were trained on a very wide range of sources. Wide enough to cover much of the data we've built a culture around.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

Except these kinds of data driven biases can creep in from all sorts of ways.

Is there a bias in what images have labels and what don't? Did they focus only on English labeling? Did they use a vision based model to add synthetic labels to unlabeled images, and if so did the labeling model introduce biases?

Just because the sampling is broad doesn't mean the processes involved don't introduce procedural bias distinct from social biases.