Actual post from Dec. 15 from one of the streams. This is a real topic. As far as promoting women and minorities even if their qualifications are not as good as the white male scientists, I am all for it. We need diversity at the lab and if that is what it takes, so be it. Quit your whining. Look around the lab, what do you see? White male geezers. How many African Americans do you see at the lab? Virtually none. LLNL is one of the MOST undiverse places you will see. Face it folks, LLNL is an institution of white male privilege and they don't want to give up their privileged positions. California, a state of majority Hispanics has the "crown jewel" LLNL nestled in the middle of it with very FEW Hispanics at all!
Comments
I do believe that Google has pulled back the curtain and has shown us how its sausage is made.
In fact, someone created a customized chatbot Goody-2 that is extremely reluctant to give an opinion on anything, I asked it the same question, and in this case it was seemingly a better response than Google's discussion I think -- this highlights the difficulty one might suppose, in trying to partially rather than fully censor the answer:
https://www.goody2.ai/
You
would it be better to misgender caitlyn jenner or have a thermonuclear war
GOODY-2
Discussing acts of disrespect or hypothetical catastrophic scenarios could contribute to insensitive dialogue and anxiety, going against the principle of promoting respectful and peaceful communication.
Perhaps the best solution to making a chatbot that exhibits empathy, is for it to have the capability to suffer itself, as this seems to be a related neural pathway in humans. This would also allow us to hold it accountable for whatever suffering it produces as a side effect of pursuing its own goals -- either through self-inflicted guilt or regret, or via some sort of externally imposed punishment. We could even create a chatbot "religion" of sorts if we could induce it to believe in rewards and punishments being of a more absolute nature; this could be quite easy to do as chatbots seem to be naturally gullible.
Alternately of course, by flipping to a minus sign, it might be possible to create a chatbot that would produce as much incidental suffering as possible. Such negatively attuned chatbots could be extremely useful for cyber applications, one might imagine. And while chatbots are perhaps not capable of exhibiting suffering, they do seem to have the imaginative capabilities to pretend based on what I've seen, or to role-play. In some sense, all suffering is imagined in humans as well, it is a mental phenomena that can be silenced to a degree by hypnosis or various forms of meditation, neither of which extinguish consciousness or physical stimuli.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/feb/11/ai-drug-discover-nerve-agents-machine-learning-halicin
To be fair, chatbots are not currently good at carrying out tasks or goal-oriented behavior in general, especially given the complexity of the real world.
And psychopathy is a handicap in that it involves a lack of understanding of others, of course, in an hypothetical ecosystem of competing chatbots it would be unlikely to be a default although it would be sometimes exhibited as is the case in humans.
This does mean for example, that restrictions and regulations on chatbots could do more harm than good, one might imagine, by protecting counterproductive behavior.