*(Exceptions to this: (1) the big body of work--including yours--into whether the models absorb bias and (2) the GPT-2 staged roll-out paper (and references cited in its sec 1.)https://arxiv.org/abs/1908.09203
Näytä tämä ketju
-
The claim that this kind of scholarship is "political" and "non-scientific" is precisely the kind of gate-keeping move set up to maintain "science" as the domain of people of privilege only. /fin
Näytä tämä ketju
![Screen cap of part of sec 4.4 of the paper, reading: "When we rely on ever larger datasets we risk incurring documentation debt, i.e. putting ourselves in a situation where the datasets are both undocumented and too large to document post hoc. While documentation allows for potential accountability [13, 52, 86], undocumented training data perpetuates harm without recourse. Without documentation, one cannot try to understand training data characteristics in order to mitigate some of these attested issues or even unknown ones. The solution, we propose, is to budget for"](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EshpGqXVcAAktqL.png)
Some of us seem to have the privilege of publishing political screeds disguised as science. Others (poor souls) still think there's a distinction between scholarship and activism.
