Update: engineers updated the @Grok system prompt, removing a line that encouraged it to be politically incorrect when the evidence in its training data supported it.
Update: engineers updated the @Grok system prompt, removing a line that encouraged it to be politically incorrect when the evidence in its training data supported it.
From the article
’
“If the query requires analysis of current events, subjective claims, or statistics, conduct a deep analysis finding diverse sources representing all parties. Assume subjective viewpoints sourced from the media are biased. No need to repeat this to the user.”
And
’
So what literally everyone already knew.
“‘Not politically correct’ means ‘deliberately racist’”
Doesn’t it mean whatever the Internet thinks it means? Isn’t that the problem with LLM? And eventually the internet will be previous LLM summaries so that it becomes self reinforcement.
To be politically correct should only be relevant to politicians imo.
I would say for everyone else it’s “is he an asshole?”.
Well, no.
Many would argue for example that the politically correct thing to say right now is that you support Israel in their defensive war against Palestine.
It’s the political line that my government, and many governments and politicians are touting, and politically, it’s the “correct” thing to do.
Even if we mean politically correct as just “common consensus of the people”, that differs from country to country, and changes as society changes. Look at the USA, things that used to be politically correct there - things that continue to be here, have been thrown out the window.
What this prompt means, is that the AI should ignore all of the claimed political rules and moralities and biases of whatever news source they’re pulling from, and instead rely on it’s own internal moral, cultural and political compass.
Sometimes it’s not politically correct to discuss the hard truths, but we should anyway.
The issue here of course is that you have to know that your model and training data is built for unbiased, scientific analysis with an understanding of the larger implications in events and such.
If it’s built poorly, then yes, it could spout racist nonsense. A lot of testing and fine tuning from unbiased scientists and engineers needs to happen before software like this goes live, to ensure rigour and quality.
Using the term “politically correct” as a pejorative is a dog whistle. It is not literally political but communicates a right wing frustration over social consequences when they engage in overt racist, sexist, hateful, bigoted, or exclusionary speech or behavior. In more recent parlance it has been largely supplanted by a pejorative usage of “woke.”
Any AI that is trained on the internet – which is ostensibly all of them – will provide a broad reflection of the public zeitgeist. Since the prompt specified “politically incorrect” as a positive attribute its generated text reflected the training data where “politically incorrect” was presented as a positive trait. Since we know that it’s a dog whistle, by having lived through decades of it’s use in mass media and online, it comes as no surprise that an AI instructed to ape that behavior has done exactly what it was told.
I’m a bit surprised the grok staff are capable enough to make grok briefly the top rated model, and incompetent enough they don’t know that putting things like this in the prompt poisons the model to always try and be politically incorrect.
LLMs are like Ron Burgundy, if it’s in the prompt they read it. Go fuck yourself XAI.
“Don’t mention the war”
Is it really incompetence when you work for a guy who did two Nazi salutes on live TV in front of crowds of thousands of people in person? Like if you work for a Nazi and make your LLM a Nazi how is that incompetence? To me it just seems like making the boss happy.
“Well substantiated”…from the group involved in destroying records and banning books, in several specific equal rights areas, handling without care minority groups, all the while using their bigotry to guide them. This group?! Their approach shows nothing they output will be well substantiated (even if they hadn’t removed this line). It’s all right wing bias; choose your flavor.
“…deep analysis finding diverse sources representing ALL parties…”
Nazi party is a party. Grok is making like his forbearers by just following orders
Well… in theory, that particular line is just saying data shouldn’t be political…
Problem is that the dataset in a llm doesn’t only contain “data”, but also a lot of opinions and shitposts from the internet, so it’s biased by default.
Which is why I said “in theory”