zlacker

>>kevema+(OP)
>While we leave an in-depth empirical analysis of social and cultural biases to future work, our small scale internal assessments reveal several limitations that guide our decision not to release our model at this time.

Some of the reasoning:

>Preliminary assessment also suggests Imagen encodes several social biases and stereotypes, including an overall bias towards generating images of people with lighter skin tones and a tendency for images portraying different professions to align with Western gender stereotypes. Finally, even when we focus generations away from people, our preliminary analysis indicates Imagen encodes a range of social and cultural biases when generating images of activities, events, and objects. We aim to make progress on several of these open challenges and limitations in future work.

Really sad that breakthrough technologies are going to be withheld due to our inability to cope with the results.

>>daenz+b5
If you tell it to generate an image of someone eating Koshihikari rice, will it be biased if they're Japanese? Should the skin color, clothing, setting, etc be made completely random, so that it's unbiased? What if you made it more specific, like "edo period drawing of a man"? Should the person draw be of a random skin color? What about "picture of a viking"? Is it biased if they're white?

At what point is statistical significance considered ok and unbiased?

>>nomel+O7
>At what point is statistical significance considered ok and unbiased?

Presumably when you're significantly predictive of the preferred dogma, rather than reality. There's no small bit of irony in machines inadvertently creating cognitive dissonance of this sort; second order reality check.

I'm fairly sure this never actually played out well in history (bourgeois pseudoscience, deutsche physik etc), so expect some Chinese research bureau to forge ahead in this particular direction.