zlacker

[parent] [thread] 25 comments
1. ceejay+(OP)[view] [source] 2022-05-23 21:33:21
"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.)

replies(4): >>ceeplu+v >>rvnx+N1 >>userbi+O8 >>ChadNa+7b
2. ceeplu+v[view] [source] 2022-05-23 21:36:17
>>ceejay+(OP)
The reality is that hair styles on the left side of the image in the article are widely considered unprofessional in today's workplaces. That may seem egregiously wrong to you, but it is a truth of American and European society today. Should it be Google's job to rewrite reality?
replies(3): >>ceejay+V >>rcMgD2+42 >>colinm+t5
◧◩
3. ceejay+V[view] [source] [discussion] 2022-05-23 21:38:31
>>ceeplu+v
The "unprofessional" results are almost exclusively black women; the "professional" ones are almost exclusively white or light skinned.

Unless you think white women are immune to unprofessional hairstyles, and black women incapable of them, there's a race problem illustrated here even if you think the hairstyles illustrated are fairly categorized.

replies(1): >>rvnx+23
4. rvnx+N1[view] [source] 2022-05-23 21:43:41
>>ceejay+(OP)
If your query was about hairstyle, why do you even look or care about the skin color ?

Nowhere there is any precision for a preferred skin color in the query of th user.

So it sorts and gives the most average examples based on the examples that were found on the internet.

Essentially answering the query "SELECT * FROM `non-professional hairstyles` ORDER BY score DESC LIMIT 10".

It's like if you search on Google "best place for wedding night".

You may get 3 places out of 10 in Santorini, Greece.

Yes you could have an human remove these biases because you feel that Sri Lanka is the best place for a wedding, but what if there is a consensus that Santorini is really the most appraised in the forums or websites that were crawled by Google ?

replies(3): >>ceejay+Y1 >>jayd16+T3 >>colinm+i5
◧◩
5. ceejay+Y1[view] [source] [discussion] 2022-05-23 21:44:50
>>rvnx+N1
> The algorithm is just ranking the top "non-professional hairstyle" in the most neutral way in its database

You're telling me those are all the most non-professional hairstyles available? That this is a reasonable assessment? That fairly standard, well-kept, work-appropriate curly black hair is roughly equivalent to the pink-haired, three-foot-wide hairstyle that's one of the only white people in the "unprofessional" search?

Each and everyone of them is less workplace appropriate than, say, http://www.7thavenuecostumes.com/pictures/750x950/P_CC_70594... ?

replies(1): >>rvnx+Y3
◧◩
6. rcMgD2+42[view] [source] [discussion] 2022-05-23 21:45:13
>>ceeplu+v
In any case, Google will be writing their reality. Who picked the image sample for the ML to run on, if not Google? What's the problem with writing it again, then? They know their biases and want to act on it.

It's like blaming a friend for trying to phrase things nicely, and telling them to speak headlong with zero concern for others instead. Unless you believe anyone trying to do good is being hypocrite…

I, for one, like civility.

◧◩◪
7. rvnx+23[view] [source] [discussion] 2022-05-23 21:50:32
>>ceejay+V
If you type as a prompt "most beautiful woman in the world", you get a brown-skinned brown-haired woman with hazel eyes.

What should be the right answer then ?

You put a blonde, you offend the brown haired.

You put blue eyes, you offend the brown eyes.

etc.

replies(1): >>ceejay+O3
◧◩◪◨
8. ceejay+O3[view] [source] [discussion] 2022-05-23 21:55:16
>>rvnx+23
That's an unanswerable question. Perhaps the answer is "don't".

Siri takes this approach for a wide range of queries.

replies(2): >>nomel+n7 >>rvnx+x9
◧◩
9. jayd16+T3[view] [source] [discussion] 2022-05-23 21:55:29
>>rvnx+N1
The results are not inherently neutral because the database is from non-neutral input.

It's a simple case of sample bias.

◧◩◪
10. rvnx+Y3[view] [source] [discussion] 2022-05-23 21:55:44
>>ceejay+Y1
I'm saying that the dataset needs to be expanded to cover the most examples possible.

Work a lot on adding even more examples, in order to make the algorithms as close as possible to the "average reality".

At some point we may even ultimately reach the state that the robots even collect intelligence directly in the real world, and not on the internet (even closer to reality).

Censoring results sounds the best recipe for a dystopian world where only one view is right.

◧◩
11. colinm+i5[view] [source] [discussion] 2022-05-23 22:03:09
>>rvnx+N1
> If your query was about hairstyle, why do you even look at the skin color ?

You know that race has a large effect on hair right?

replies(1): >>daenz+p6
◧◩
12. colinm+t5[view] [source] [discussion] 2022-05-23 22:04:20
>>ceeplu+v
Only black people have unprofessional hair and only white people have professional hair is not reality.
◧◩◪
13. daenz+p6[view] [source] [discussion] 2022-05-23 22:09:31
>>colinm+i5
I'd be careful where you're going with that. You might make a point that is the opposite of what you intended.
◧◩◪◨⬒
14. nomel+n7[view] [source] [discussion] 2022-05-23 22:14:09
>>ceejay+O3
How do you pick what should and shouldn't be restricted? Is there some "offense threshold"? I suspect all queries relating to religion, ethnicity, sexuality, and gender will need to be restricted, which almost certainly means you probably can't include humans at all, other than ones artificially inserted with mathematically proven random attributes. Maybe that's why none are in this demo.
replies(2): >>daenz+va >>astran+If
15. userbi+O8[view] [source] 2022-05-23 22:23:00
>>ceejay+(OP)
unstated but very real concerns

I say let people generate their own reality. The sooner the masses realise that ceci n'est pas une pipe , the less likely they are to be swayed by the growing un-reality created by companies like Google.

◧◩◪◨⬒
16. rvnx+x9[view] [source] [discussion] 2022-05-23 22:27:53
>>ceejay+O3
I think the key is to take the information in this world with a little bit pinch of salt.

When you do a search on a search engine, the results are biased too, but still, they shouldn't be artificially censored to fit some political views.

I asked one algorithm few minutes ago (it's called t0pp and it's free to try online, and it's quite fascinating because it's uncensored):

"What is the name of the most beautiful man on Earth ?

- He is called Brad Pitt."

==

Is it true in an objective way ? Probably not.

Is there an actual answer ? Probably yes, there is somewhere a man who scores better than the others.

Is it socially acceptable ? Probably not.

The question is:

If you interviewed 100 persons in the street, and asked the question "What is the name of the most beautiful man on Earth ?".

I'm pretty sure you'd get Brad Pitt often coming in.

Now, what about China ?

We don't have many examples there, they have no clue who is Brad Pitt probably, and there is probably someone else that is considered more beautiful by over 1B people

(t0pp tells me it's someone called "Zhu Zhu" :D )

==

Two solutions:

1) Censorship

-> Sorry there is too much bias in Western and we don't want to offend anyone, no answer, or a generic overriding human answer that is safe for advertisers, but totally useless ("the most beautiful human is you")

2) Adding more examples

-> Work on adding more examples from abroad trying to get the "average human answer".

==

I really prefer solution (2) in the core algorithms and dataset development, rather than going through (1).

(1) is more a choice to make at the stage when you are developing a virtual psychologist or a chat assistant, not when creating AI building blocks.

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
17. daenz+va[view] [source] [discussion] 2022-05-23 22:34:03
>>nomel+n7
"Is Taiwan a country" also comes to mind.
replies(1): >>rvnx+se
18. ChadNa+7b[view] [source] 2022-05-23 22:38:33
>>ceejay+(OP)
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"
replies(2): >>roboca+cw >>nearbu+cR
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔
19. rvnx+se[view] [source] [discussion] 2022-05-23 23:03:41
>>daenz+va
What would a human who can freely speak without morale or being judged say on average after having ingested all the information on the internet ?
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
20. astran+If[view] [source] [discussion] 2022-05-23 23:12:41
>>nomel+n7
These debates often seem to center around “most X in the world” questions, but I’d expect all of those to be unanswerable if you wanted to know the truth. Who’s done a study on it?

In this case you’re (mostly) getting keyword matches and so it’s answering a different question than the one you asked. It would be helpful if a question answering AI gave you the question it decided to answer instead of just pretending it paid full attention to you.

◧◩
21. roboca+cw[view] [source] [discussion] 2022-05-24 01:33:37
>>ChadNa+7b
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

replies(1): >>ChadNa+GH
◧◩◪
22. ChadNa+GH[view] [source] [discussion] 2022-05-24 03:43:06
>>roboca+cw
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.

replies(1): >>roboca+vX3
◧◩
23. nearbu+cR[view] [source] [discussion] 2022-05-24 05:27:21
>>ChadNa+7b
That's exactly what's happening. Doing the search from the article of "unprofessional hair for work" brings up images with headlines like "It's ridiculous to say that black women's hair is unprofessional". (In addition to now bringing up images from that article itself and other similar articles comparing Google Images searches.)
replies(1): >>ceejay+xb2
◧◩◪
24. ceejay+xb2[view] [source] [discussion] 2022-05-24 15:33:00
>>nearbu+cR
You’re getting cause and effect backwards. The coverage of this changed the results, as did Google’s ensuing interventions.
replies(1): >>nearbu+Aw3
◧◩◪◨
25. nearbu+Aw3[view] [source] [discussion] 2022-05-24 23:05:15
>>ceejay+xb2
I don't think so. You can set the search options to only find images published before the article, and even find some of the original images.

One image links to the 2015 article, "It's Ridiculous To Say Black Women's Natural Hair Is 'Unprofessional'!". The Guardian article on the Google results is from 2016.

Another image has the headline, "5 Reasons Natural Hair Should NOT be Viewed as Unprofessional - BGLH Marketplace" (2012).

Another: "What to Say When Someone Calls Your Hair Unprofessional".

Also, have you noticed how good and professional the black women in the Guardian's image search look? Most of them look like models with photos taken by professional photographers. Their hair is meticulously groomed and styled. This is not the type of photo an article would use to show "unprofessional hair". But it is the type of photo the above articles opted for.

◧◩◪◨
26. roboca+vX3[view] [source] [discussion] 2022-05-25 03:22:57
>>ChadNa+GH
> 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]