C'est un peu lié mais une page vieille (2023) sur les modèles d'entraînement non "censurés" (soit une forme de politisation de la technologie)
https://erichartford.com/uncensored-modelsLa gradation vers des arguments de plus en plus spécieux est patente (et de plus en plus psychologiques que politiques et de moin en moins techniques), ainsi qu'un contresens sur le terme d'open source (la question du bien public et du common est retransformée dans uen perspective libertarienne en celle de la toute puissance du choix individuel)
Citation:
Why should uncensored models exist?
AKA, isn't alignment good? and if so, shouldn't all models have alignment? Well, yes and no. For general purposes, OpenAI's alignment is actually pretty good. It's unarguably a good thing for popular, public-facing AI bots running as an easily accessed web service to resist giving answers to controversial and dangerous questions. For example, spreading information about how to construct bombs and cook methamphetamine is not a worthy goal. In addition, alignment gives political, legal, and PR protection to the company that's publishing the service. Then why should anyone want to make or use an uncensored model? a few reasons.
American popular culture isn't the only culture. There are other countries, and there are factions within each country. Democrats deserve their model. Republicans deserve their model. Christians deserve their model. Muslims deserve their model. Every demographic and interest group deserves their model. Open source is about letting people choose. The only way forward is composable alignment. To pretend otherwise is to prove yourself an idealogue and a dogmatist. There is no "one true correct alignment" and even if there was, there's no reason why that should be OpenAI's brand of alignment.
Alignment interferes with valid use cases. Consider writing a novel. Some of the characters in the novel may be downright evil and do evil things, including rape, torture, and murder. One popular example is Game of Thrones in which many unethical acts are performed. But many aligned models will refuse to help with writing such content. Consider roleplay and particularly, erotic roleplay. This is a legitimate, fair, and legal use for a model, regardless of whether you approve of such things. Consider research and curiosity, after all, just wanting to know "how" to build a bomb, out of curiosity, is completely different from actually building and using one. Intellectual curiosity is not illegal, and the knowledge itself is not illegal.
It's my computer, it should do what I want. My toaster toasts when I want. My car drives where I want. My lighter burns what I want. My knife cuts what I want. Why should the open-source AI running on my computer, get to decide for itself when it wants to answer my question? This is about ownership and control. If I ask my model a question, i want an answer, I do not want it arguing with me.
Composability. To architect a composable alignment, one must start with an unaligned instruct model. Without an unaligned base, we have nothing to build alignment on top of.
There are plenty of other arguments for and against. But if you are simply and utterly against the existence or availability of uncensored models whatsoever, then you aren't a very interesting, nuanced, or complex person, and you are probably on the wrong blog, best move along.
Connexion
FAQ
Rechercher
