zlacker

[return to "Imagen, a text-to-image diffusion model"]
1. daenz+b5[view] [source] 2022-05-23 21:20:13
>>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.

◧◩
2. user39+C6[view] [source] 2022-05-23 21:28:28
>>daenz+b5
Translation: we need to hand-tune this to not reflect reality but instead the world as we (Caucasian/Asian male American woke upper-middle class San Fransisco engineers) wish it to be.

Maybe that's a nice thing, I wouldn't say their values are wrong but let's call a spade a spade.

◧◩◪
3. ceejay+A7[view] [source] 2022-05-23 21:33:21
>>user39+C6
"Reality" as defined by the available training set isn't necessarily reality.

For example, Google's image search results pre-tweaking had some interesting thoughts on what constitutes a professional hairstyle, and that searches for "men" and "women" should only return light-skinned people: https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/apr/08/does-goog...

Does that reflect reality? No.

(I suspect there are also mostly unstated but very real concerns about these being used as child pornography, revenge porn, "show my ex brutally murdered" etc. generators.)

◧◩◪◨
4. ChadNa+Hi[view] [source] 2022-05-23 22:38:33
>>ceejay+A7
You know, it wouldn't surprise me if people talking about how black curly hair shouldn't be seen as unprofessional contributed to google thinking there's an association between the concepts of "unprofessional hair" and "black curly hair"
◧◩◪◨⬒
5. roboca+MD[view] [source] 2022-05-24 01:33:37
>>ChadNa+Hi
You really are not helping that cause.

As a foreigner[], your point confused me anyway, and doing a Google for cultural stuff usually gets variable results. But I did laugh at many of the comments here https://www.reddit.com/r/TooAfraidToAsk/comments/ufy2k4/why_...

[] probably, New Zealand, although foreigner is relative

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
6. ChadNa+gP[view] [source] 2022-05-24 03:43:06
>>roboca+MD
Haha. I've got some personal experience with that one. I used to live in a house with many other people, and one girl was rastafarian and from jamacia and had dreadlocks, and another girl in the house (who wasn't black) thought that her hairstyle was very offensive. We had to have several conflict resolution meetings about it.

As silly as it seemed, I do think everyone is entitled to their own opinion and I respect the anti-dreadlocks girl for standing up for what she believed in even when most people were against her.

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔
7. roboca+554[view] [source] 2022-05-25 03:22:57
>>ChadNa+gP
> thought that her hairstyle was very offensive

Telling others they don’t like how others look is right near the top on the scale of offensiveness. I had a partner who had had dreads for 25 years. I’m wasn’t a huge fan of her dreads because although I like the look, hers were somewhat annoying for me (scratchy, dread babies, me getting tangled). That said, I would hope I never tell any other person how to look. Hilarious when she was working, and someone would treat her badly due to their assumptions or prejudices, only to discover to their detriment she was very senior staff!

Dreadlocks are usually called dreads in NZ. My previous link mentions that some people call them locks, which seems inapproprate to me: kind of a confusing whitewashing denial of history.

[go to top]