This was supposed to be part three but I entirely screwed it up and now it's part 2. Hopefully someday I get back to redoing the original part 2. There is an entity at play that does not want you to know what I was writing in the original part 2. But anyway, on with this version for now...
Google to change research process after uproar over scientists' firing
"Exits of Timnit Gebru and Margaret Mitchell sparked backlash from inside and outside the company."
(I remember reading this article when it first appeared. It's one of those ones that had a screen shot floating around for so long that never got a post written about it so it finally got deleted. When I first read it I was all onboard with the Gender/racism angel of the story. But now combine these earlier events with Blake Lemonie's claim of AI and in particular LaMDA going sentient and things all the sudden appear in a new light.)
"Google will change procedures before July for reviewing its scientists’ work, according to a town hall recording heard by Reuters, part of an effort to quell internal tumult over the integrity of its artificial intelligence (AI) research."
(Okay, so why do this then?)
"In remarks at a staff meeting last Friday, Google Research executives said they were working to regain trust after the company ousted two prominent women and rejected their work, according to an hour-long recording, the content of which was confirmed by two sources."
(The article is over a year old, but why all the turmoil?)
"Internal reviewers had demanded that at least three papers on AI be modified to refrain from casting Google technology in a negative light, Reuters reported."
"Jeff Dean, Google’s senior vice-president overseeing the division, said on Friday that the “sensitive topics” review “is and was confusing” and that he had tasked a senior research director, Zoubin Ghahramani, with clarifying the rules, according to the recording."
(Yeah...okay...sure thing)
"An internal email, seen by Reuters, offered fresh detail on Google researchers’ concerns, showing exactly how Google’s legal department had modified one of the three AI papers, called Extracting Training Data from Large Language Models."
(Remember that "Extracting Training Data from Large Language Models." That is 100% critical. I'll show you why here in a second. And please remember that the AI Blake Lemoine said was sentient was LaMDA or “Language Model for Dialogue Applications”)
"The email, dated 8 February, from a co-author of the paper, Nicholas Carlini, went to hundreds of colleagues, seeking to draw their attention to what he called “deeply insidious” edits by company lawyers."
“Let’s be clear here,” the roughly 1,200-word email said. “When we as academics write that we have a ‘concern’ or find something ‘worrying’ and a Google lawyer requires that we change it to sound nicer, this is very much Big Brother stepping in.”
(Again why? Whats so worrying Google to the point where they feel their lawyers have to step in and edit what its researchers are saying?)
"Required edits, according to his email, included “negative-to-neutral” swaps such as changing the word “concerns” to “considerations,” and “dangers” to “risks”. Lawyers also required deleting references to Google technology; the authors’ finding that AI leaked copyrighted content; and the words “breach” and “sensitive”, the email said.
Carlini did not respond to requests for comment. Google, in answer to questions about the email, disputed its contention that lawyers were trying to control the paper’s tone. The company said it had no issues with the topics investigated by the paper, but it found some legal terms used inaccurately and conducted a thorough edit as a result."
(Okay...yeah sure...right...:-). Thats sarcasim BTW. These were the people whose motto for the longest was "Dont be evil?)
"Racial equity audit
Google last week also named Marian Croak, a pioneer in internet audio technology and one of Google’s few Black vice-presidents, to consolidate and manage 10 teams studying issues such as racial bias in algorithms and technology for disabled individuals.
Croak said at Friday’s meeting that it would take time to address concerns among AI ethics researchers and mitigate damage to Google’s brand. “Please hold me fully responsible for trying to turn around that situation,” she said on the recording."
(There is your diversion, that is not what all the fervor was about I assure you)
"Tensions in Dean’s division had deepened in December after Google fired Timnit Gebru, co-lead of its ethical AI research team, following her refusal to retract a paper on language-generating AI. Gebru, who is Black, accused the company at the time of reviewing her work differently because of her identity and of marginalizing employees from underrepresented backgrounds. Nearly 2,700 employees signed an open letter in support of Gebru.
(Why is it always about language-generating AI? It's not about her being black, or her Gender it's everything to do with what she was saying in her paper that she refused to retract.)
“We want responsible AI and ethical AI investigations,” Dean said, giving the example of studying technology’s environmental costs.
(Thats why they got the lawyers editing things, they want "responsible AI and ethical AI investigations", makes prefect sense.
"Gebru defended her paper’s citation. “It’s a really bad look for Google to come out this defensively against a paper that was cited by so many of their peer institutions,” she told Reuters.
"Employees continued to post about their frustrations over the last month on Twitter as Google investigated and then fired Margaret Mitchell, an ethical AI co-lead, for moving electronic files outside the company. Mitchell said on Twitter that she had acted “to raise concerns about race & gender inequity, and speak up about Google’s problematic firing of Dr Gebru”.
"Mitchell had collaborated on the paper that prompted Gebru’s departure, and a version that published online last month without Google affiliation named “Shmargaret Shmitchell” as a co-author."
"Asked for comment, Mitchell expressed through an attorney disappointment in Dean’s critique of the paper and said her name was removed following a company order."
Okay, follow the bouncing ball.
So far we have the following facts in front of us:
Blake LeMoine
(Currently on administrative leave from google, and will probably end up terminated from his position with the company would be my guess)
He is a senior software engineer and AI researcher. His research focuses on artificial ethics and natural language processing. The AI Blake Lemoine said was sentient was LaMDA or “Language Model for Dialogue Applications”
Dr.Timnit Gebru,
Terminated co-lead of its (Googles) ethical AI research team, following her refusal to retract a paper on language-generating AI
and
Margaret Mitchell,
an ethical AI co-lead
Terminated, had worked on Dr. GeBru's research paper.
And:
"Google’s legal department had modified one of the three AI papers, called Extracting Training Data from Large Language Models."
My contention is, It's not the racial/gender biases AI demonstrates in these papers that the lawyers are worried about.
It's this:
6 Answers to Questions About the Antichrist
"Question #
2. How will he unite the nations?
The prophet Daniel describes the Antichrist in these terms: “After this I saw in the night visions, and behold, a fourth beast…. And there... were eyes like the eyes of a man, and a mouth speaking pompous words.... He shall speak pompous words against the Most High” (Daniel 7:7-8, 25)."
"The coming world leader will be renowned for his eloquence, which will capture the attention and administration of the world."
"As Daniel says, the coming world leader will be renowned for this kind of eloquence, which will capture the attention and administration of the world."
"Daniel goes on to tell us that not only will this golden-tongued orator speak in high-blown terms, but he will also speak arrogantly against God. The apostle John describes him similarly in the book of Revelation: “And he was given a mouth speaking great things and blasphemies” (Revelation 13:5)."
"Daniel continues his description of the Antichrist by telling us he is a man “whose appearance was greater than his fellows” (Daniel 7:20). In terms of his outward appearance, this man will be strikingly attractive. The combination of his magnetic personality, speaking ability, and extreme good looks will make him virtually irresistible to the masses. The apostle John expands on Daniel’s description of the Antichrist’s blasphemous acts by telling us that every living person will be required to worship this man. “He was granted power to give breath to the image of the beast, that the image of the beast should both speak and cause as man as would not worship the image of the beast to be killed” (Revelation 13:15)."
"The combination of his magnetic personality, speaking ability, and extreme good looks will make him virtually irresistible to the masses."
"Finally, Revelation 13:1-8 describes the Antichrist as a Beast—an appropriate title for him. During the last 3½ years of the Tribulation, the Antichrist will personify Satan himself. Second Thessalonians 2:9 says, “The coming of the lawless one is according to the working of Satan, with all power, signs, and lying wonders.” Step by step, the Antichrist will promote himself from a European leader, to a world leader, to a tyrannical global dictator, and finally to a god."
(I dont go with the European leader bit unless you wanna include Turkey as a part of Europe, but everything else I am 100% absolutely onboard with, you betcha, in particular the eloquence with which he will speak, leading many to their destruction. And remember there is already AI that can read in 45 minutes what it would take a human 9000 years to read.
Everybody thought I was crazy when I said AI would be the antichrist.
Now?
They have kinda given my case credence.
So who is crazy now?
Would be my question, and why all the hubbub about language focused AI at Google?
I love you honey.
I knew these would be intense today.
Probably why I put it off for a while.
I'll get around to the original PT 2 here soon I hope, but right now these two pieces are more than enough for people to chew on, digest etc...
TTYS sweetheart.
No comments:
Post a Comment