this post was submitted on 23 May 2024
154 points (78.9% liked)

Technology

59405 readers
2702 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 3 points 5 months ago

What, does it talk like that grey bluetooth speaker often featured on Dankpods?

[–] [email protected] 8 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Isn't calling the voice "flirty" sexist? It didn't seem flirty in any of the clips I heard of it.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 5 months ago

This was my voice of choice because it sounded like a "person on the other side" is engaged. Like when you talk to a friend or teacher who's interested in the topic.
If somebody thinks it's somehow related to sexuality, gender questions, etc, they have to check themselves.

[–] [email protected] 35 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (5 children)

But if OpenAI didn’t do anything wrong, why would it take down the voice?

This almost made me stop reading. What a garbage point, if someone is offended by something I did, even if I did nothing wrong, I don't do it to them again because I'm not an asshole. He's clearly an asshole who tried to use her voice anyway, but this line of questioning is garbage...decent people apologize all the time when they've done nothing wrong, and then not do the offending thing again, without admitting guilt.

But the design choice is worrying on an ethical level. Researchers say it reinforces sexist stereotypes of women as servile beings who exist only to do someone else’s bidding — to help them, comfort them, and plump up their ego.

And this is where I stopped. If they had used a male voice, they could have argued that they were excluding women. But they did a study and picked the voice people would respond to the best. And objective choice. The author set out to find sexism, and by golly they did it. Amazing.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 5 months ago (1 children)

What a garbage point, if someone is offended by something I did, even if I did nothing wrong, I don't do it to them again because I'm not an asshole.

Putting aside the jury still being out in the last part of that statement, Sam Altman has showed himself to not only be an asshole, but an asshole who will do anything he thinks he can get away with. So the statement you took issue with "but if OpenAI didn't do anything wrong, why would it take down the voice" is accurate. Considering the pattern of behavior from Altman and OpenAI that action is a rather implicit admission of guilt.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 5 months ago

They did something wrong. We both agree.

But the suggestion that doing something to correct the offense is considered an admission of guilt is garbage logic. This is why people are so hesitant to apologize or move to correct perceived wrongs, because people treat doing so as an admission that you did something wrong.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Well what about the fact that they asked her to do it multiple times and right before they launched it the CEO tweeted the word "Her"?

[–] [email protected] 5 points 5 months ago (1 children)

He’s clearly an asshole who tried to use her voice anyway

Can you explain to me what you think this line meant?Because I'm not sure how I could have made it more clear.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

I don't really care what the article says or what opinions the author has. I'm just asking what you think about those facts involving the subject of said articles.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 5 months ago (1 children)

I believe I've already answered your question, with the statement I quoted, which is why I'm asking you what you think that means.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 5 months ago (1 children)

My bad, I thought you were quoting the article, not yourself. It's clear now I wasn't seeing the difference between disagreeing with the article and disagreeing with them fucking up. It's no excuse but I was probably high, I am right now too

[–] [email protected] 4 points 5 months ago

Lol I'm over it. Enjoy. I'm hoping to join you real soon out in this nice weather we're having.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

The potential of a "exclusion argument" does not justify reinforcing the servile, assistant stereotype. Researchers arent pulling that one out of their ass.

I could pull together a youtube playlist of beardy men explaining why woman hating is bad. Would you like that?

(Edit: Rhetorical. We can all see your true colors with the "gay agenda" conspiracy pushing bs.)

[–] [email protected] 4 points 5 months ago

The potential of a “exclusion argument” does not justify reinforcing the servile, assistant stereotype.

My point is that no matter what openai did, the author could have found sexism in it. It's not hard to create something like this if you're really trying.

I could pull together a youtube playlist of beardy men explaining why woman hating is bad. Would you like that?

I don't follow.

(Edit: Rhetorical. We can all see your true colors with the “gay agenda” conspiracy pushing bs.)

Lol. I've been an lbgtq ally probably even before you were born. The fact that I can see that this ridiculously biased source for what it is doesn't make me a conspiracy theorist against gay people.

Thanks for demonstrating my point. You were desperate to reveal my "try colors" and, by golly, you were going to find it regardless of how much you had to spin.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 5 months ago

Yeah this is a real: "Let me find a problem and not let them apologize." You don't like Open AI. Ok. I'm sure you have a good reason. So focus on that and stop contriving controversy. You're not changing any minds like that. That only gets kudos from people that already agree with you.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 months ago (3 children)

Why not just have both a male and female voice, and ideally one that's as neutral as possible?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 5 months ago

There is a choice of different voices, it wasn't and isn't a problem. But Sky was the best in my opinion, so even if I support the right of ms Johansson to not hear her voice out of every device, it's personally kinda sad that they're removing it

[–] [email protected] 7 points 5 months ago

They do have 2 male voices. The article is complaining about the choice of sky for the demo.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 5 months ago

Neutral is boring? Flaws add as much character to a thing as beauty

[–] [email protected] -1 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

I've listened to it, and it sounds nothing like Scarlett does. I had to find a movie with Scarlett in it to compare with, and I can honestly tell you ChatGPT sounds nothing like Natasha in Black Widow.

(Joke aside, ChatGPT doesn't sound like Scarlett at all).

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

After the uproar, I was expecting it to be way closer...but not at all? Really?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

I probably should say "IMO".

They played it on a local radio station here yesterday, and even they were mocking it as "not close".

[–] [email protected] 2 points 5 months ago

Didnt hear this radio interview, but the video they released sounded too close based on the fact that they asked for permission and she said no.

load more comments
view more: next ›