Topical and historical censorship should be disclosed

[Mosnar]

Select Topic Area

General

Body

It seems all LLMs include a disclaimer that their output may be incorrect; however, with the release of Deepseek R1, I think it would be prudent to introduce a new disclaimer for models that have been trained to hide or misrepresent historical events and political issues. The censorship in models like this goes beyond the traditional ethical censorship we see in almost all current models (e.g. bomb making, CSAM, racism). I think it sets a dangerous precedent if consumers of censored models are not made aware of political biases that could interfere with serious applications, such as summarization of news or educational systems.

This is not intended to be a critique of Chinese censorship - that is beyond the scope of this discussion. I suggest this disclaimer be required on all models that have demonstrated targeted censorship.

[harshra215]

You raise a very important point about transparency in AI models. The potential for AI models to misrepresent or hide historical events and political issues is indeed concerning. Introducing a disclaimer for models that have demonstrated targeted censorship could help users be more aware of the biases and limitations of these models.

Such a disclaimer could include information about the types of content that have been censored or altered, the reasons for the censorship, and the potential impact on the accuracy and reliability of the model's output. This would allow users to make more informed decisions about how to use these models, especially in critical applications like news summarization and educational systems.

Ensuring transparency and accountability in AI models is crucial for maintaining trust and integrity in AI technologies. By clearly disclosing any targeted censorship, we can help mitigate the risks associated with biased or manipulated information and promote a more ethical and responsible use of AI.

[Rochdi7]

Transparency in AI models is crucial. Adding a disclaimer for targeted censorship could improve user awareness. Have you thought about proposing this directly to AI providers or through an open discussion forum?

[Mosnar]

Do you have any suggestions for where to start? Happy to do some leg work, I'm just not sure how to get in touch with people who can help.

[Rochdi7]

Great to hear Here are some ways to start engaging with AI providers and relevant communities:

1. Contact AI Model Developers Directly

• Many AI providers have official channels for feedback and discussion:
  • OpenAI: https://help.openai.com (support) or their forum
  • DeepMind: https://www.deepmind.com/contact
  • Anthropic (Claude AI): https://www.anthropic.com/contact
  • Meta AI: If related to Llama, check their GitHub
  • Deepseek AI: If the concern is specific to Deepseek R1, you might need to check their official documentation or forums.

2. Engage in Open Discussion Forums

• Hugging Face Discussions: https://discuss.huggingface.co/
• Reddit AI Ethics & Research Communities:
  • r/ArtificialIntelligence
  • r/MLQuestions
  • r/AIethics

3. Academic and Policy Channels

• AI Ethics & Transparency Research Groups:
  • The Partnership on AI https://www.partnershiponai.org/
  • AI research labs at universities (MIT, Stanford, etc.)
  • AI Alignment Forums: https://www.alignmentforum.org/

4. Open a Public Discussion on GitHub

• Some AI companies, like OpenAI and Meta, have GitHub repositories where discussions happen.
• If Deepseek R1 is open-source, you could open an issue in their GitHub repo and ask for more transparency.

if you find this helpfull please mark it as answered Good Luck Sir!