stoneparchment

stoneparchment, 10 days ago

The chemist in me is appalled… But the queer clown in me is delighted 🏳️‍🌈🤡

stoneparchment, 17 days ago

I LOVE this

stoneparchment, 1 month ago

shoulda said “yarrr, ye dumb bastard!”

stoneparchment, 3 months ago

how reliable do you think herbs-info.com is?

(the answer is probably: not very)

stoneparchment, 3 months ago

pictures cannot capture the ephemeral, indescribable beauty of the moments of totality

total eclipse wins every time

get effin HYPE

stoneparchment, 3 months ago

that is pretty metal and sick, you’re right

the tradeoff is that the ring of fire means you can’t look directly at it even at peak totality…

but either is so friggin hype

stoneparchment, 2 months ago

awesome!! I’m psyched you caught it and enjoyed it :-)

stoneparchment, 3 months ago

WHERE’S THE ICE VOLCANO

stoneparchment, 4 months ago (edited 4 months ago)

It’s also like, I guess I would prefer it to make mistakes like this if it means it is less biased towards whiteness in other, less specific areas?

Like, we know these models are dumb as rocks. We know that they are imperfect and that they mirror the biases of their trainers and training data, and that in American society that means bias towards whiteness. If the trainers are doing what they can to prevent that from happening, whatever, that’s cool… even if the result is some dumb stuff like this sometimes.

I also don’t think it’s a problem for the user to specify race if it matters? Like “a white queen of England” is a fine thing to ask for, and if it isn’t specified, the model will include diverse options even if they aren’t historically accurate. No one gets bent out of shape if the outfits aren’t quite historically accurate, for example

stoneparchment, 4 months ago

• it’s true that this would mislead children, but the model could hallucinate about literally anything. Especially at this stage, no one-- children or adults-- should be uncritically accepting what the model states as fact. That said, I agree LLMs need to improve their factual accuracy
• Although it is highly debated, some scholars suggest Queen Charlotte might have had African ancestry, or that she would be considered a POC by today’s standards. Of course, she reigned in the 17-1800s, but it isn’t entirely outlandish to have a “Queen of Color”, if we aren’t requesting a specific queen or a specific race
• People of color did live in England in the middle ages? Like not diverse in the way we conceive now, but here are a few papers discussing the racial diversity at the time. It was surely less intermingled than today, but it’s not like these images are impossible
• Other things are anachronistic or fantastical about these images, such as clothing. Are we worried about children getting the wrong impression of history in that sense?
• Of course increasing visibility and representation of all kinds of marginalized people is important. I, myself, am disabled, so I care about that representation too-- thanks for pointing out how we could improve the model further. I do kinda feel like people would be groaning if the model had produced a Queen with a visible disability, though… I would be delighted to be wrong on this front :)

stoneparchment, 4 months ago (edited 4 months ago)

That’s valid! I agree. I think in this case it would be reasonable for the model to give multiple (or like, at least one, jeez) images with white queens. I don’t disagree with anyone in that sense. I just also don’t think it’s worth pitching a fit when the dumbass model that has been trained to show more racial diversity produces (frankly comical) hallucinations.

The ethos of the trainers is a good one. Attempting to counter the (demonstrated, measurable) bias of many models toward whiteness is a good choice. I prefer that the trainers choose to address the bias even if it (sometimes, in early versions) makes the model make silly mistakes like this. That’s all.

stoneparchment, 4 months ago

why am I attracted to the man in teletubby stiletto boots?? Why???

stoneparchment, 4 months ago

Girl, this community is full of trans folks, and not all of us are trans women. I’d wager the majority of people annoyed with this post are not cis, and it seems like some of them are trans women, too

It’s not even something I would post in a community just for trans women, like what about trans women that don’t end up with these characteristics? Are people only trans women if they identify with these changes? Why is the assumption that men (and I guess pre-transition trans women) have anger issues and porn addictions? Why are those qualities tied to their hormones and physical bodies, so trans women who can’t or won’t medically transition are excluded from benefitting?