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.

top 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 130 points 2 years ago (75 children)

I don't know how you'd solve the problem of making a generative AI accurately create a slate of images that both a) inclusively produces people with diverse characteristics and b) understands the context of what characteristics could feasibly be generated.

But that's because the AI doesn't know how to solve the problem.

Because the AI doesn't know anything.

Real intelligence simply doesn't work like this, and every time you point it out someone shouts "but it'll get better". It still won't understand anything unless you teach it exactly what the solution to a prompt is. It won't, for example, interpolate its knowledge of what US senators look like with the knowledge that all of them were white men for a long period of American history.

  • source
  • hideshow 78 child comments
  • [–] 46 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    You don't do what Google seems to have done - inject diversity artificially into prompts.

    You solve this by training the AI on actual, accurate, diverse data for the given prompt. For example, for "american woman" you definitely could find plenty of pictures of American women from all sorts of racial backgrounds, and use that to train the AI. For "german 1943 soldier" the accurate historical images are obviously far less likely to contain racially diverse people in them.

    If Google has indeed already done that, and then still had to artificially force racial diversity, then their AI training model is bad and unable to handle that a single input can match to different images, instead of the most prominent or average of its training set.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 16 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    Ultimately this is futile though, because you can do that for these two specific prompts until the AI appears to "get it", but it'll still screw up a prompt like "1800s Supreme Court justice" or something because it hasn't been trained on that. Real intelligence requires agency to seek out new information to fill in its own gaps; and a framework to be aware of what the gaps are. Through exploration of its environment, a real intelligence connects things together, and is able to form new connections as needed. When we say "AI doesn't know anything" that's what we mean--understanding is having a huge range of connections and the ability to infer new ones.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 2 years ago

    That's why I hate that they started to call them artificial intelligence. There is nothing intelligent in them at all. They work on probability based on a shit ton of data, that's all. That's not intelligence, that's basically brute force. But there is no going back at this point, I know.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] 30 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 child)

    Edit: further discussion on the topic has changed my viewpoint on this, its not that its been trained wrong on purpose and now its confused, its that everything its being asked is secretly being changed. It's like a child being told to make up a story by their teacher when the principal asked for the right answer.

    Original comment below


    They’ve purposefully overrode its training to make it create more PoCs. It’s a noble goal to have more inclusivity but we purposely trained it wrong and now it’s confused, the same thing as if you lied to a child during their education and then asked them for real answers, they’ll tell you the lies they were taught instead.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 17 points 2 years ago (5 children)

    This result is clearly wrong, but it's a little more complicated than saying that adding inclusivity is purposedly training it wrong.

    Say, if "entrepreneur" only generated images of white men, and "nurse" only generated images of white women, then that wouldn't be right either, it would just be reproducing and magnifying human biases. Yet this a sort of thing that AI does a lot, because AI is a pattern recognition tool inherently inclined to collapse data into an average, and data sets seldom have equal or proportional samples for every single thing. Human biases affect how many images we have of each group of people.

    It's not even just limited to image generation AIs. Black people often bring up how facial recognition technology is much spottier to them because the training data and even the camera technology was tuned and tested mainly for white people. Usually that's not even done deliberately, but it happens because of who gets to work on it and where it gets tested.

    Of course, secretly adding "diverse" to every prompt is also a poor solution. The real solution here is providing more contextual data. Unfortunately, clearly, the AI is not able to determine these things by itself.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • load more comments (5 replies)
  • [–] 13 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Easy, just add "no racism please, except for nazi-related stuff" into the ever expanding system prompt.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • load more comments (72 replies)
    [–] 86 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    It's great seeing time and time again that no one really does understand these models and that their preconceived notions of what biases exist ends up shooting them in the foot. It truly shows that they don't really understand how systematically problematic the underlying datasets are and the repurcussions of relying on them too heavily.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 55 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    inclusivity is obviously good but what googles doing just seems all too corporate and plastic

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 53 points 2 years ago (12 children)

    A Washington Post investigation last year found that prompts like “a productive person” resulted in pictures of entirely white and almost entirely male figures, while a prompt for “a person at social services” uniformly produced what looked like people of color. It’s a continuation of trends that have appeared in search engines and other software systems.

    This is honestly fascinating. It's putting human biases on full display at a grand scale. It would be near-impossible to quantify racial biases across the internet with so much data to parse. But these LLMs ingest so much of it and simplify the data all down into simple sentences and images that it becomes very clear how common the unspoken biases we have are.

    There's a lot of learning to be done here and it would be sad to miss that opportunity.

  • source
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • load more comments (12 replies)
    [–] 42 points 2 years ago (12 children)

    Honestly, this sort of thing is what’s killing any sort of enjoyment and progress of these platforms. Between the INCREDIBLY harsh censorship that they apply and injecting their own spin on things like this, it’s nigh on impossible to get a good result these days.

    I want the tool to just do its fucking job. And if I specifically ask for a thing, just give me that. I don’t mind it injecting a bit of diversity in say, a crowd scene - but it’s also doing it in places where it’s simply not appropriate and not what I asked for.

    It’s even more annoying that you can’t even PAY to get rid of these restrictions and filters. I’d gladly pay to use one if it didn’t censor any prompt to death…

  • source
  • hideshow 13 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 2 years ago* (5 children)

    I want the tool to just do its fucking job. And if I specifically ask for a thing, just give me that. I don’t mind it injecting a bit of diversity in say, a crowd scene - but it’s also doing it in places where it’s simply not appropriate and not what I asked for.

    The thing is, if it's injecting diversity into a place where there shouldn't have been diversity, this can usually be fixed by specifying better in the next prompt. Not by writing ragebait articles about it.

    But yeah, I'd also be happy to be able to use an unhinged LLM once in a while.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • load more comments (5 replies)
  • load more comments (11 replies)
    [–] 38 points 2 years ago* (14 children)

    No matter what Google does, people are going to come up with gotcha scenarios to complain about. People need to accept the fact that if you don't specify what race you want, then the output might not contain the race you want. This seems like such a silly thing to be mad about.

  • source
  • hideshow 16 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 2 years ago

    It's silly to point at brand new technology and not expect there to be flaws. But I think it's totally fair game to point out the flaws and try to make it better, I don't see why we should just accept technology at its current state and not try to improve it. I totally agree that nobody should be mad at this. We're figuring it out, an issue was pointed out, and they're trying to see if they can fix it. Nothing wrong with that part.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (12 replies)
    [+] 37 points 2 years ago* (last edited 1 year ago)
    [–] 34 points 2 years ago* (3 children)

    Why would anyone expect "nuance" from a generative AI? It doesn't have nuance, it's not an AGI, it doesn't have EQ or sociological knowledge. This is like that complaint about LLMs being "warlike" when they were quizzed about military scenarios. It's like getting upset that the clunking of your photocopier clashes with the peaceful picture you asked it to copy

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 15 points 2 years ago (4 children)

    I'm pretty sure it's generating racially diverse nazis due to companies tinkering with the prompts under the hood to counterweight biases in the training data. A naive implementation of generative AI wouldn't output black or Asian nazis.

    it doesn't have EQ or sociological knowledge.

    It sort of does (in a poor way), but they call it bias and tries to dampen it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • load more comments (4 replies)
  • load more comments (2 replies)
    [–] 32 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Now that shit is funny. I hope more people take more time to laugh at companies scrambling to pour billions into projects they don't understand.

    Laugh while it's still funny, anyway.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 31 points 2 years ago (3 children)

    If the black Scottish man post is anything to go by, someone will come in explaining how this is totally fine because there might've been a black Nazi somewhere, once.

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 27 points 2 years ago (1 child)
  • [–] 27 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Someone needs to edit this to feature Kanye

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 18 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Looks like they scrubbed swastikas out of the training set? I have mixed feelings about this. Like if they want something to have historical accuracy or my own personal opinions on censorship that shouldn't be scrubbed. But also this is the perfect tool to churn out endless amounts of pro nazi propaganda so maybe it's safer to keep it removed?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 20 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Kanye has entered the chat.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 20 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Who exactly are they apologizing to? Is it the Nazis?

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 15 points 2 years ago

    Oh no, not racial impurity in my Nazi fanart generator! /s

    Maybe you shouldn't use a plagiarism engine to generate Nazi fanart. Thanks

  • source
  • [–] 15 points 2 years ago (5 children)

    It's okay when Disney does it. What a world. Poor AI, how are they supposed to learn if all its data is created by mentally ill and crazy people. ٩(。•́‿•̀。)۶

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • load more comments (5 replies)
    [–] 10 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    This could make for some hilarious, alternate history satire or something. I could totally see Key and Peele heading a group of racially diverse nazis ironically preaching racial purity and attempting to take over the world.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 9 points 2 years ago

    I can't fathom why google would force diversity into AI.

    People use AI as tools. If the tool doesn't work correctly, people will not use it, full stop. It's that simple.

    There are many different AI out there that don't behave this way and people will be quick to move on to one of those instead.

    Surprisingly stupid even for google.

  • source
  • [–] 9 points 2 years ago (3 children)

    I dont get the "American Woman" one

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • load more comments (2 replies)
    load more comments
    view more: next ›