AIs are not magical, they just learn to put things together from what they were given.
Google being a "progressive" company would have of course trained it to walk on egg shells when someone questions a gender assumption that it makes. It's well within their corpus and culture.
I'd say, generally, if you say "I'm a he/him" then it will call you a "he/him" - to separate that into treating it as he / him in the grammatical sense just seems like a "basic grammar" module that would have to be bolted after someone is classified as male or female, nevermind non-binary types.
I wonder if all future AIs now have to dedicate some portion of their NN to grammar-and-gender rules to avoid upsetting modern sensibilities.
I kind of think that we need to steer AIs away from trying to talk like humans at all. We can develop a simple grammar and language that AIs share information with, something a little more efficient than English perhaps.
But then what value are we to extract? Not much of its not in our language..
Thankfully I just train all my AIs to talk in the second person ("YOU" etc.) So it's another way to avoid the problem, but still might have eggshells in the public sphere, so I don't really release
How would that be any different than the AI referring to people by their name instead of just “Meatbag”? Do you just call everyone you work with whatever name you feel like giving them? You look like a Josh to me, I’ll call you Josh.
What? On one to one conversations there's only two members, "me" and "you"
My point is that you don't have to code in "Josh" - or of you do, it can just be "name=Josh". But save effort in the actual logic of what you're doing.
I don't get what the problem is? I'm saying just using "You" is a lot simpler than "he/she"
Ok, what when I talk to you, and say, "so, I saw Mike the other day in an accident." What do you reply? "oh, how is Mike? Did Mike hurt Mike?" Or do you reply "Oh, how is he? Did he hurt himself?"
And adding to this, isn't the whole issue assuming that Mike is a male? Imagine training a medical bot that gets stuck in a loop asking about pronouns in a an automated 911 call, for instance.
Modern society isn't easy to program for, if we're trying to make robots that conform to (western, minority) "norms".
Going back to my original post: "I kind of think that we need to steer AIs away from trying to talk like humans at all."
The question is "why would I be talking to ai about an accident involving another person?"
Is it a medical AI? then perhaps it would be better to refer to Mike as "the patient", etc. Which is how it would be handled in code.
Are you looking to make friends with your ai? Then no, I think you need to go find real humans to talk to, who can navigate complex human social interactions better.
But then you're not speaking to Mike, right? You're speaking about Mike. So unless the person you're speaking with gets offended on Mike's behalf I don't see what the problem is.
And yet it came up in the conversation nonetheless, even with only two participants.
I can think of different reasons why the person’s pronouns might be relevant even though it’s only a two party conversation. Maybe the bot will read back to the human a message the bot will send to someone else about their conversation for verification of accuracy. That might contain a third person reference to the human participant.
> So it's another way to avoid the problem, but still might have
> eggshells in the public sphere, so I don't really release.
Go ahead and be traditional, even if the snowflakes find it a bit offensive. They're looking for offense, it's an arms race. The deeper you bury it now the more you'll have to work to appease them.
AIs are not magical, they just learn to put things together from what they were given.
Google being a "progressive" company would have of course trained it to walk on egg shells when someone questions a gender assumption that it makes. It's well within their corpus and culture.
I'd say, generally, if you say "I'm a he/him" then it will call you a "he/him" - to separate that into treating it as he / him in the grammatical sense just seems like a "basic grammar" module that would have to be bolted after someone is classified as male or female, nevermind non-binary types.
I wonder if all future AIs now have to dedicate some portion of their NN to grammar-and-gender rules to avoid upsetting modern sensibilities.
I kind of think that we need to steer AIs away from trying to talk like humans at all. We can develop a simple grammar and language that AIs share information with, something a little more efficient than English perhaps.
But then what value are we to extract? Not much of its not in our language..
Thankfully I just train all my AIs to talk in the second person ("YOU" etc.) So it's another way to avoid the problem, but still might have eggshells in the public sphere, so I don't really release