Technology

You don't do what Google seems to have done - inject diversity artificially into prompts.

You solve this by training the AI on actual, accurate, diverse data for the given prompt. For example, for "american woman" you definitely could find plenty of pictures of American women from all sorts of racial backgrounds, and use that to train the AI. For "german 1943 soldier" the accurate historical images are obviously far less likely to contain racially diverse people in them.

If Google has indeed already done that, and then still had to artificially force racial diversity, then their AI training model is bad and unable to handle that a single input can match to different images, instead of the most prominent or average of its training set.

Edit: further discussion on the topic has changed my viewpoint on this, its not that its been trained wrong on purpose and now its confused, its that everything its being asked is secretly being changed. It's like a child being told to make up a story by their teacher when the principal asked for the right answer.

Original comment below

They’ve purposefully overrode its training to make it create more PoCs. It’s a noble goal to have more inclusivity but we purposely trained it wrong and now it’s confused, the same thing as if you lied to a child during their education and then asked them for real answers, they’ll tell you the lies they were taught instead.

I'll get the usual downvotes for this, but:

Because the AI doesn't know anything.

is untrue, because current AI fundamentally is knowledge. Intelligence fundamentally is compression, and that's what the training process does - it compresses large amounts of data into a smaller size (and of course loses many details in the process).

But there's no way to argue that AI doesn't know anything if you look at its ability to recreate a great number of facts etc. from a small amount of activations. Yes, not everything is accurate, and it might never be perfect. I'm not trying to argue that "it will necessarily get better". But there's no argument that labels current AI technology as "not understanding" without resorting to a "special human sauce" argument, because the fundamental compression mechanisms behind it are the same as behind our intelligence.

Edit: yeah, this went about as expected. I don't know why the Lemmy community has so many weird opinions on AI topics.

Easy, just add "no racism please, except for nazi-related stuff" into the ever expanding system prompt.

Its not an issue. Gemini can generate the apology for you.

Honestly pisses me off that so many real humans lack the contextual awareness to know that contextual awareness is a concept that does not even exist to LLMs.

It's trying so hard to not be racist that is being even more racist than other AI, is hilarious

It’s putting human biases on full display at a grand scale.

The skin color of people in images doesn't matter that much.

The problem is these AI systems have more subtle biases, ones that aren't easily revealed with simple prompts and amusing images, and these AIs are being put to work making decisions who knows where.

It's putting human biases on full display at a grand scale.

Not human biases. Biases in the labeled data set. Those could sometimes correlate with human biases, but they could also not correlate.

But these LLMs ingest so much of it and simplify the data all down into simple sentences and images that it becomes very clear how common the unspoken biases we have are.

Not LLMs. The image generation models are diffusion models. The LLM only hooks into them to send over the prompt and return the generated image.

I want the tool to just do its fucking job. And if I specifically ask for a thing, just give me that. I don’t mind it injecting a bit of diversity in say, a crowd scene - but it’s also doing it in places where it’s simply not appropriate and not what I asked for.

The thing is, if it's injecting diversity into a place where there shouldn't have been diversity, this can usually be fixed by specifying better in the next prompt. Not by writing ragebait articles about it.

But yeah, I'd also be happy to be able to use an unhinged LLM once in a while.

I'm pretty sure it's generating racially diverse nazis due to companies tinkering with the prompts under the hood to counterweight biases in the training data. A naive implementation of generative AI wouldn't output black or Asian nazis.

it doesn't have EQ or sociological knowledge.

It sort of does (in a poor way), but they call it bias and tries to dampen it.

Kanye?

Hey! If Demoman catches you talkin' anymore shit like that he's gonna turn the lot of us into a fine red spray!

It's a demonstration that the model is coded to include diversity, and it doesn't generate 4 middle aged WASP moms