These powerful language models force developers and ordinary users to confront a wide array of concerns: the use of unconsented data, the perpetuation of bias, stereotype, and discrimination, deliberate misuse via disinformation campaigns, and entrenchment of corp power.
The opening keynote by @mmitchell_ai set the stage for the conversation and raised issues about the very label "foundation models."
The presentation by @james_y_zou is a powerful demonstration of how existing language models stubbornly perpetuate anti-Muslim bias. Watch the short 10 minute presentation.
The presentation by @shelbygrossman at @stanfordio examined how LLMs are rocket fuel for disinformation campaigns. It's not a question of "if" there will be malicious users; it's a question of developing & deploying the models with this in mind.
And @StanfordEthics & @StanfordHAI postdoc @KathleenACreel pointed to the homogenizing effects of foundation models and the distinctive ethical questions that arise here. Foundation models are potentially a kind of linguistic monoculture.
Check out the paper just posted on foundation models for a longer discussion of some of these topics.
Writing is a solitary undertaking, but this book is the result of an amazing community of students and colleagues, esp Jeremy Weinstein & @mehran_sahami
"Philanthropy, as far as I can see, is rapidly becoming the recognizable mark of a wicked man" -- G.K. Chesterton, 1909.
In these days of criticizing Sackler and Epstein philanthropy, it's worth remembering that the complaints about tainted money and tainted donors are old.
Or consider what President Roosevelt and Samuel Gompers said of John D. Rockefeller's idea of creating the Rockefeller Foundation:
.@lessig's post about @Joi & @medialab distinguishes appropriately between well-intentioned people with tainted money (R.J. Reynolds) and bad people with clean money (presumably Jeffrey Epstein) and advises rejecting tainted money while accepting money anonymously from bad people
Another chapter in ethics of field experiments in social science:
American economists and political scientists at @UChicago, @Stanford, @MIT and @Harvard randomly incentivize young Hong Kong university students to engage in antiauthoritarian protests.
The experimenters don't pay people to protest in the streets, but they pay people conditional on behavior that occurs during protesting in the streets.
And the experiment appears to have passed IRB processes at @stanford, @UCBerkeley, and elsewhere!
1. Tax breaks will be given to French donors. Significant tax concessions, according to @nytimes: 66% deduction for individual donations and 60% for corporate donations. So a 100K Euro donation only costs the donor 34K Euro.
Will foreign donations also be tax advantaged?
2. Will large donors be permitted to wrap themselves in the glory of the restored cathedral? Perhaps even claiming some naming rights?
Will some part of Notre Dame now be known as the Pinault Visitor Center and the Arnault spire?