Notices by Emily M. Bender (she/her) (emilymbender@dair-community.social), page 3

Some that would be appropriate to the GPT models include Data Statements for Natural Language Processing (Bender & Friedman 2018, Bender et al 2021), Datasheets for Datasets (Gebru et al 2018, 2021) and Model Cards for Model Reporting (Mitchell et al 2019).

>>

Without clear and thorough documentation of what is in the dataset and the properties of the trained model, we are not positioned to understand its biases and other possible negative effects, to work on how to mitigate them, or fit between model and use case. That is, not beyond the obvious first pass questions of: Is this a use case where synthetic text is even appropriate? Very few use cases are."

>>

It was an easy prediction to make, given #OpenAI 's track record for sure. Still, I could wish that it wasn't so thoroughly validated.

They are willfully ignoring the most basic risk mitigation strategies, all while proclaiming themselves to be working towards the benefit of humanity.

https://sigmoid.social/@Riedl/110023271456110373

@zoeschiffer @caseynewton

Self-regulation was never going to be sufficient, but I believe that internal teams working in concert with external regulation could have been a really beneficial combination.

https://twitter.com/emilymbender/status/1336517038525665280?s=20

>>

@zoeschiffer @caseynewton

So, what can we do as researchers and otherwise, in this moment?

I have to believe there is value in calling out #AIhype when we see it, in declining to participate in the #AIhype, and in advocating for regulation.

And those who are making buck off of this will try to tell us: You can't regulate this --- that will stifle progress!

To which I ask: Progress towards what, exactly?

>>

@zoeschiffer @caseynewton

And they will tell us: You can't possibly regulate effectively anyway, because the tech is moving too fast.

But (channeling Ryan Calo here): The point of regulation isn't to micromanage specific technologies but rather to establish and protect rights. And those are enduring.

>>

@zoeschiffer @caseynewton

I call on everyone who is close to this tech: we have a job to do here. The techcos where the $, data and power have accumulated are abandoning even the pretext of "responsible" development, in a race to the bottom.

At the very least, we should be working to educate those around us not to fall for the hype---to never accept "AI" medical advice, legal advice, psychotherapy, etc.

MSFT lays off its responsible AI team

The thing that strikes me most about this story from @zoeschiffer and @caseynewton is the way in which the MSFT execs describe the urgency to move "AI models into the hands of customers"

https://www.platformer.news/p/microsoft-just-laid-off-one-of-its

>>

@zoeschiffer @caseynewton

There is no urgency to build "AI". There is no urgency to use "AI". There is no benefit to this race aside from (perceived) short-term profit gains.

It is very telling that when push comes to shove, despite having attracted some very talented, thoughtful, proactive, researchers, the tech cos decide they're better off without ethics/responsible AI teams.

>>

@haydenfield Followed by: “There seems to be, I would say, a surprising amount of investment in this idea…and a surprising eagerness to deploy it, especially in the search context, apparently without doing the testing that would show it’s fundamentally flawed.”

“A lot of the coverage talks about them as not yet ready or still underdeveloped—something that suggests that this is a path to something that would work well, and I don’t think it is,” me to @haydenfield in this piece for Tech Brew:

https://www.emergingtechbrew.com/stories/2023/03/07/how-google-s-2021-ai-ethics-debate-foreshadowed-the-future

#AIHype #MathyMath #ChatGPT #Bard

If you feel like it wouldn't be interesting without that window dressing, it's time to take a good hard look at the scientific validity of what you are doing, for sure.

Meanwhile: Getting off the hype train is just the first step. Once you've done that and dusted yourself off, it's time to ask: how can you help put the brakes on it?

I'd like to point out: Serious AI researchers can get off the hype train at any point. It might not have been your choice that your field was invaded by the Altmans of the world, but sitting by quietly while they spew nonsense is a choice.

Likewise, describing your own work in terms of unmotivated and aspirational analogies to human cognitive abilities is also a choice.

>>

I really enjoyed this episode of the Tech Won't Save Us podcast with @timnitGebru

https://techwontsave.us/episode/151_dont_fall_for_the_ai_hype_w_timnit_gebru

Listening to Timnit reflect on how fast the things we warned about in the #StochasticParrots paper came to pass left me wondering: what if instead $Billions we put into clean energy (or making the grid alternative energy ready or carbon capture or...)?

Finally had a moment to read this statement from the FTC and it is 🔥🔥🔥

https://www.ftc.gov/business-guidance/blog/2023/02/keep-your-ai-claims-check

A few choice quotes:

>>

#AIHype #MathyMath #FTC

"But one thing is for sure: ["AI" is] a marketing term. Right now it’s a hot one. And at the FTC, one thing we know about hot marketing terms is that some advertisers won’t be able to stop themselves from overusing and abusing them. "

https://www.ftc.gov/business-guidance/blog/2023/02/keep-your-ai-claims-check

>>

No, they don't want to address actual problems in the actual world (which would require ceding power). They want to believe themselves gods who can not only create a "superintelligence" but have the beneficence to do so in a way that is "aligned" with humanity.

/fin

And, more to the point: There are harms NOW. Harms to privacy, theft of creative output, harms to our information ecosystems, and harms from the scaled reproduction of biases. An organization that cared about "benefiting humanity" wouldn't be developing and disseminating tech that does those things.

>>

The contradiction in these next two paragraphs is stunning: We think you should be able to do whatever you want with our systems, because "diversity of ideas" but also we think we can align the systems with "human values". So, assholes can create fake revenge porn, but that's okay because-?

>>

LOLOL -- calling something a "ratio" doesn't make measurable or, ahem, real.

>>