• 0x0@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    40
    arrow-down
    14
    ·
    6 months ago

    A traditional outfit

    How traditional? How statistically relevant is it? Most Indians i know do not wear turbans at all.

    If these stats are trustworthy (and i think they are), the only Indians that wear turbans are Sikhs (1.7%) and Muslims (14.2%). I’d say 15.9% is not statistically significant.

    • catsarebadpeople@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      56
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      I think you’re looking at it wrong. The prompt is to make an image of someone who is recognizable as Indian. The turban is indicative clothing of that heritage and therefore will cause the subject to be more recognizable as Indian to someone else. The current rate at which Indian people wear turbans isn’t necessarily the correct statistic to look at.

      What do you picture when you think, a guy from Texas? Are they wearing a hat? What kind? What percentage of Texans actually wear that specific hat that you might be thinking of?

    • otp@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      31
      ·
      6 months ago

      I think the idea is that it’s what makes a person “an Indian” and not something else.

      Only a minority of Indians wear turbans, but more Indians than other people wear turbans. So if someone’s wearing a turban, then that person is probably Indian.

      I’m not saying that’s true necessarily (though it may be), but that’s how the AI interprets it…or how pictures get tagged.

      It’s like with Canadians and maple leaves. Most Canadians aren’t wearing maple leaf stuff, but I wouldn’t be surprised if an AI added maple leaves to an image of “a Canadian”.

    • rimjob_rainer@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      25
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      6 months ago

      Imagine a German man from Bavaria… You just thought of a man wearing Lederhosen and holding a beer, didn’t you? Would you be surprised if I told you that they usually don’t look like that outside of a festival?

        • catsarebadpeople@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          10
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          6 months ago

          Are you literally the second coming of Jesus? Hey everybody! I found a guy who doesn’t see race! I can’t believe it but he doesn’t think anyone is changed in any way by the place that they grew up in or their culture! Everyone is a blank slate to this guy! It’s amazing!

          • mriormro@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            6 months ago

            No, I just don’t lob groups of people together. It’s not that hard to do, everyone’s a different person.

      • 0x0@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        6 months ago

        A traditional dress is not a religious dress,

        Point taken.

        On a footnote: why should the concept of a traditional dress be offensive?

        Ain’t to me, couldn’t care less. I was just trying to point out that most Indians do not seem to wear turbans (and based my reasoning on the religions dress alone).

    • HopeOfTheGunblade@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      6 months ago

      You don’t think nearly 1/6th is statistically significant? What’s the lower bound on significance as you see things?

      To be clear, it’s obviously dumb for their generative system to be overrepresenting turbans like this, although it’s likely to be a bias in the inputs rather than something the system came up with itself, I just think that 5% is generally enough to be considered significant and calling three times that not significant confuses me.

      • 0x0@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        6 months ago

        You don’t think nearly 1/6th is statistically significant?

        For statistics’ sake? Yes.

        For the LLM bias? No.

        • tabular@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          6 months ago

          The fact less people of that group actually wear it than do is significant when you want an average sample. When categorizing a collection of images then, naturally, the traditional garments of a group is associated more with that group than any other group: 1/6 is bigger than any other race.

        • Womble@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          6 months ago

          so if there was a country where 1 in 6 people had blue skin you would consider that insignificant because 5 out of 6 didn’t?

    • Duamerthrax@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      6 months ago

      What’s the data that the model is being fed? What percentage of imaging featuring Indian men are tagged as such? What percentage of imaging featuring men wearing Turbans are tagged as Indian Men? Are there any images featuring Pakistan men wearing Turbans? Even if only a minority of Indian feature Turbans, if that’s the only distinction between Indian and Pakistan men in the model data, the model will favor Turbans for Indian Men. That’s just a hypothetical explanation.

    • ramble81@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      Except if they trained it on something that has a large proportion of turban wearers. It is only as good as the data fed to it, so if there was a bias, it’ll show the bias. Yet another reason this really isn’t “AI”