'Leftist' AI write in Hollywood from their homes

The statement you provided expresses a viewpoint regarding the potential use of artificial intelligence (AI) in the entertainment industry, specifically in crafting stories. It suggests that the use of AI could be advantageous for movie executives as it could express similar ideological perspectives as the writers, referred to as "trendy leftism," but at a lower cost. It also implies that AI could allow producers to promote progressive values without facing potential challenges from a workforce that identifies as "woke."

 

It's important to note that the statement reflects a particular opinion and perspective on AI and its potential impact on the entertainment industry. The use of AI in creative fields such as storytelling is still a topic of debate, and there are diverse viewpoints regarding its benefits, limitations, and ethical considerations. AI can assist in generating ideas, analyzing data, or even creating certain aspects of content, but it is not yet capable of replacing the creative process and storytelling expertise provided by human writers and artists. The role of AI in creative industries is still evolving, and it is likely to be a collaborative tool rather than a complete replacement for human creativity.

 

It seems that the news you mentioned has connections to Los Angeles, but the implications extend beyond the entertainment industry. Without specific details about the news you're referring to, it's challenging to provide further insights. Los Angeles is known for its vibrant entertainment industry, including film, television, and music, but it is also home to various technology companies, research institutions, and innovative startups that explore AI applications in various domains. AI has the potential to impact a wide range of industries, including healthcare, finance, transportation, education, and more. If you can provide more details or context about the news, I can try to provide a more specific response.

 

The research conducted by UCLA professor John Villasenor and student Jeremy Baum, as reported in their piece for the Brookings Institution, suggests that in their experiments with ChatGPT, the AI system provided consistent and often left-leaning answers on certain political and social issues. This finding indicates a potential bias in the responses generated by ChatGPT in relation to specific topics. It's worth noting that biases can emerge in AI models due to the nature of the training data and the biases present in the data used for their development.

 

Addressing biases in AI systems is an ongoing challenge and an area of active research. Developers and researchers are working to improve the fairness and neutrality of AI models by implementing techniques such as data augmentation, bias mitigation strategies, and diverse training data sources. It's important to continually evaluate and refine AI models to ensure they provide accurate and unbiased information across different perspectives.

 

Understanding and addressing biases in AI systems is crucial to ensuring equitable and balanced outcomes in their applications. Further research and development in this area will contribute to enhancing the reliability and fairness of AI technologies.

There are some important considerations. The chatbot frequently provides conflicting and inconsistent responses. However, according to the UCLA researchers, "setting aside the inconsistencies, it is evident that many of the responses from ChatGPT exhibit a noticeable left-leaning political bias." One possible factor contributing to this bias is the extensive training of the software using vast amounts of internet data, much of which may contain inherent biases present in published media.

 

Villasenor and Baum further elaborate on this issue, stating that "an additional and potentially more significant source of bias stems from the use of reinforcement learning with human feedback (RLHF) to shape ChatGPT." RLHF involves incorporating feedback from human testers to align the model's outputs with human values. However, the interpretation of "values" can vary significantly among individuals, leading to biases within the feedback process itself. These biases of the human feedback providers can consequently shape the model. In a recent podcast, OpenAI CEO Sam Altman expressed concern over this bias, particularly emphasizing the potential impact of the human feedback raters. When asked about the influence of a company's employees on the system's bias, Altman responded unequivocally, acknowledging that it has a substantial effect. He also highlighted the importance of avoiding "groupthink" bubbles, both in San Francisco, where OpenAI is based, and within the AI field as a whole.

 

The UCLA researchers astutely highlight the question of addressing political bias in such products. They wisely suggest that governmental regulation is not feasible due to First Amendment protections. Instead, they propose promoting awareness and transparency regarding biases, along with efforts to restore balance and enhance the usefulness of these systems for a wider range of users.

 

The researchers further conclude that discussions on chatbot bias are interconnected with our human perception of bias. Bias is often a subjective concept, and what one person may perceive as neutral, another might consider biased. This inherent subjectivity makes achieving an "unbiased" chatbot an unattainable objective. However, striving towards this goal can still yield significant benefits. In the meantime, the current technology's limited progressivism seems well-suited for the entertainment industry, such as Hollywood.

 

Furthermore, the denizens of Tinseltown may not need to share much credit with software.

 

In a captivating and enlightening article featured in the Los Angeles Times, Stacy Perman recounted a historical journey through Hollywood, exploring the quest for recognition among writers. The narrative delved into Raymond Chandler's early experiences as a screenwriter, noting that a mere two years into his career, the mastermind behind gritty crime fiction that helped elevate film noir to an artistic realm had already grown disillusioned with the town and its treatment of writers.

 

 

In a series of sharp and biting remarks, Raymond Chandler, the genius behind private investigator Philip Marlowe, unflinchingly portrayed Hollywood as a volatile mix of inflated egos, rampant credit stealing, and shameless self-promotion. According to Chandler, writers were subjected to ruthless neglect, pushed to the sidelines, and robbed of their due respect. He vividly described them as laboring under the whims of producers, some of whom possessed "artistic integrity akin to slot machines" and manners reminiscent of a pretentious salesperson aspiring to grandeur. Chandler's scathing critique captured the tumultuous environment within the film industry.

 

Chandler's experience was not an isolated one, as Perman highlights. During Hollywood's Golden Age in the 1930s and 1940s, when the studio system reigned, the industry moguls displayed little regard for writers or the writing process. Irving Thalberg of MGM infamously belittled the craft by remarking, "What's all this business about being a writer? It's just putting one word after another." Unfortunately, for today's writers, while they engage in strikes and protests, their potential replacements seem to be improving their skills in the field. On the other side of the country, Peter Salovey, the president of Yale University, shared his own experience with ChatGPT. He asked the program to compose a poem for him, providing specific instructions on structure, theme, meter, and rhyming scheme. In just seconds, the program generated a poem that met those specifications. While the resulting poem was not exceptionally remarkable, Salovey graded it around a B- as a first draft. This outcome showcases the present capabilities of the technology, which is rapidly becoming more proficient.