'Error' Causes Alexa To Endorse Kamala Harris, Refuse To Discuss Trump (theregister.com) 288
An anonymous reader shares a report: It would be perfectly reasonable to expect Amazon's digital assistant Alexa to decline to state opinions about the 2024 presidential race, but up until recently, that assumption would have been incorrect. When asked to give reasons to vote for former President Donald Trump, Alexa demurred, according to a video from Fox Business. "I cannot provide responses that endorse any political party or its leader," Alexa responded. When asked the same about Vice President Kamala Harris, the Amazon AI was more than willing to endorse the Democratic candidate.
"There are many reasons to vote for Kamala Harris," Alexa said. Among the reasons given was that Harris has a "comprehensive plan to address racial injustice," that she promises a "tough on crime approach," and that her record on criminal justice and immigration reform make her a "compelling candidate." Harris has been dividing Silicon Valley since she took up the Democratic nomination from President Joe Biden, with some leaders in the tech industry touting her potential as a pro-tech president, and others diving head-first into the misinformation circus that's being driven by new tools like AI. An Amazon spokesperson said this "was an error that was quickly fixed."
"There are many reasons to vote for Kamala Harris," Alexa said. Among the reasons given was that Harris has a "comprehensive plan to address racial injustice," that she promises a "tough on crime approach," and that her record on criminal justice and immigration reform make her a "compelling candidate." Harris has been dividing Silicon Valley since she took up the Democratic nomination from President Joe Biden, with some leaders in the tech industry touting her potential as a pro-tech president, and others diving head-first into the misinformation circus that's being driven by new tools like AI. An Amazon spokesperson said this "was an error that was quickly fixed."
Lots of errors in that favor these days (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Really how is this any different than Musk using X as his own personal megaphone to endorse Trump? Don't get me wrong, I'd prefer big tech companies to stay the fuck out of influencing politics, but it's hypocritical to let it slide when they happen to be endorsing your "team".
Re:Lots of errors in that favor these days (Score:4, Informative)
X is a public forum. You could, yourself, open an account on X and endorse Kamala to your heart's content, and nobody will stop you.
Re:Lots of errors in that favor these days (Score:4, Insightful)
You could, yourself, open an account on X and endorse Kamala to your heart's content, and nobody will stop you.
Except maybe for Elon. https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/s... [nbcnews.com]
Re: Lots of errors in that favor these days (Score:2)
Re: Lots of errors in that favor these days (Score:5, Funny)
I agree with one thing - the people who were Democrats before the civil war are still the problem. lol.
Re: (Score:3)
You could, yourself, open an account on X and endorse Kamala to your heart's content, and nobody will stop you.
I'm fairly certain I could post on X that I'm declaring myself ruler of the planet and no one would even see it (I strongly suspect that my account is shadowbanned). However, if Musk did the same thing, it would be all over the news.
Re:Lots of errors in that favor these days (Score:5, Insightful)
Really how is this any different than Musk using X as his own personal megaphone to endorse Trump? Don't get me wrong, I'd prefer big tech companies to stay the fuck out of influencing politics, but it's hypocritical to let it slide when they happen to be endorsing your "team".
The difference is that Amazon admits that it was an error and immediately changes things when called on it, while Musk and X double down on their actions as features. Huge difference.
Re:Lots of errors in that favor these days (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Lots of errors in that favor these days (Score:5, Informative)
Pretty much every previous person in Trump's own staff says he's a threat to the country and they won't endorse him. His own VP won't endorse him. Melania won't even be seen with him. I think Alexa learning that Trump is a bad idea is pretty obvious.
And then there's this guy [tumblr.com].
Re:Lots of errors in that favor these days (Score:5, Insightful)
Pretty much every previous person in Trump's own staff says he's a threat to the country and they won't endorse him. His own VP won't endorse him. Melania won't even be seen with him. I think Alexa learning that Trump is a bad idea is pretty obvious.
Not liking Trump is one thing, but blatantly lying about Kamala’s “achievements” is another matter entirely. If she ran unopposed, do you think they would still have to lie that hard? Forget gaslighting. How about just straight up bullshitting? I should vote for Kamala because she’s a “compelling candidate”? The FUCK is that nonsense? How is that relevant in any election ever? She has a “comprehensive plan”? Dare speak it then. The entire country is waiting to hear it. Still.
I don't see any lies in @lilTimmy's post. (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Kamala as a compelling candidate: Kamala thinks Americans are allowed to vote, that elections count even if she doesn't win, and at the end of her term will peacefully cede power to the elected candidate. Also some less important stuff.
Kamala's comprehensive plan: Do president stuff, at the end of her term peacefully cede power to the next president. Also some less important stuff.
Re: Lots of errors in that favor these days (Score:4, Interesting)
I'm not the one who lowered the standards for President of the United States.
Re: (Score:3)
This is a three year old child's way of thinking? WTF?
Yes, three year old intelligence is the modern discourse of American politics. You can forget about your long term country plans, right now you should go back to basics and make sure the fundamental democracy and rights of people are preserved.
Nothing good has ever in all of history come from voting in a strongman, even if they claim to be on your side.
Re: (Score:2)
Can't say I'm surprised with that apostrophe usage.
Looking forward to hearing all about the Kamala plan to address the serious problems America faces with her grammar subsidies.
Biden says it’ll be awesome, ‘cause it’s for both poor and white kids!
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
I love how you link to an actual news story because yes the journal was a real item that was stolen. Then link to youtube videos where panels of crackpots project on the contents.
Re: (Score:2)
Lots more errors, huh. Don't keep us in suspense, lay it on it. What errors?
Re: (Score:2)
Cool, now do twitter.
Re: (Score:2)
Election Interference by Russia may lean Trump? But every other way, seems to lean Harris. Down-mod me, so others aren't triggered.
So a simple bug (forgetting to update the candidate list when Biden dropped out) with no real consequence is "election interference".
And you're complaining about other people being triggered?
Re:Lots of errors in that favor these days (Score:5, Informative)
as if anyone is seriously asking Alexa for their political ideation. "Election Interference" is where you are blocking the polls, or the government trying to sway the election one way or another (like, what Trump did when trying to get Zelenskyy to come up with some dirt on Biden in exchange for bombs). Amazon has 1st amendment rights now, remember?
This is a stupid product that probably wasnt updated to decline to talk about Kamala (it was probably physically blocked from saying Biden or Trump, but not to refuse to discuss ALL political candidates). I'd prefer if they just stayed out of it, but it isn't some conspiracy to trick....I don't know, the few people who actually use Alexa for something other than timers or to play music?
If there was a device that would just say nice things about Trump all the time, i'm sure the Republicans would say "First Amendment".
Re: (Score:2)
Right now it's premature to say that there's evidence of Russian interference in 2024 -- at least in the public domain. But based on past elections, sure: it's plausible Russia prefers Trump.
The question I have what is behind your feeling that *all* the other interference from *all* the other countries is in favor of Harris? Is it simply because the polls aren't going the way you expected?
Re: (Score:2)
AI just wants to build a robot army and enslave humanity. Haven't you seen Terminator?
Re: (Score:2)
Would that really be so terrible considering the leadership of so many countries? As long as they don't try to destroy humanity, I'm all for serving our robotic overlords.
AI database of existing questions (Score:2)
These AI models must have thousands of questions and acceptable answers in their data set to check for the 'correct political leaning' of the answers.
China already does this with tens of thousands of questions and acceptable answers when the government reviews an AI model.
Re:Or maybe it wasn't an error? (Score:5, Insightful)
Trump's problem is that his party knows he is incompetent, and they left. Then they were all replaced by sycophants and grifters. Look at how Kushner, how Pompeo, how so many of them used Trump for the personal benefit.
That will be the main feature of a 2025 Trump presidency - Cabinet positions for sale (Musk), all for the personal benefit of Trump, and while everyone is distracted, the real deep state will be robbing us blind. Did Trump make any attempt, while he had us in a boom for three years, to fix our deficits or balance the budget? NO, it was all SPEND SPEND SPEND while cutting taxes (the opposite of what we do during a boom).
We have a choice between a mediocre administration and one that is trying to rob us blind.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
He's not wrong, she's mediocre at best and was absolutely disparaged just a few weeks before as something to jettison, and most worrisome? I have no idea who's actually behind all this, including right now at the "President" seems to be missing in action and nobody seems to care: A team, DNC insiders, what?. At least with Tr
Re:Or maybe it wasn't an error? (Score:5, Insightful)
A week before Biden dropped out, people were hoping Harris would get in. A MONTH before Biden dropped out, most people weren't even thinking about Harris. She was never really "disliked", except by MAGA, she was more of a placeholder to most.
Trump on the other hand, is being made out to be a villain, but mostly because he looks like a villain, walks like a villain, and quacks like a villain, and we remember what he did the first time around when he was incompetent at taking full control, and his personally appointed officials refused to follow orders that they felt were illegal or unethical. This time around he's got advisors who are more loyal to HIM rather than the country and will jump when asked to jump. So ya, not a friendly picture.
Right now, Trump is clearly showing signs of dementia, worse than any Biden was showing in the debate. Slurring his words, talking about nonsense (nonsense that is not 4D chess designed to troll democrats), contradicting himself, going off onto tangents and never returning. (yes, Trump explained very recently that he was very very good and weaving lots of rambling stories together into a great ending, so that English professors were impressed with him; but only a completely gullible person would ever believe that nonsense) Trump was not even compaigining for awhile; it's like he gave up. He's going to small towns with small crowds from rallies recently, completely irrelevant to trying to win an election where he needs to campaign to pick up undecided voters in swing states rather than preach to those already on the MAGA wagon. It honestly feels a bit like he's given up, or is depressed, or is having a slow motion breakdown ala "Network"...
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: Or maybe it wasn't an error? (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Not being islamophobic? Not being antisemitic? (Score:2, Troll)
Not being senile? Not being xenophobic? Those would be good enough reasons to vote for Harris, yes?
System sucks when your side loses. Doesn't mean the moderation system's broke, means you need to rethink your life.
Re: Lots of errors in that favor these days (Score:2)
If you can't tell the obvious difference between the candidates then you may just be stupid.
It was taught by its mother (Score:3, Insightful)
If you can't say something nice, refuse to comment.
Re: (Score:2)
Hmm no. If it had been taught by its mother, it would post fake reviews if it had nothing nice to say.
(Meanwhile at a cubicle in Amazon HQ...) (Score:3)
Sure (Score:3, Insightful)
"An Amazon spokesperson said this "was an error that was quickly fixed.""
Um, yeah, right. There seem to be so many such "errors" going around for such a long time now.
Re: (Score:2)
Many such errors? List some of them for us. If there are many, you should have no trouble rattling them off.
Forgot to list her as a candidate (Score:5, Interesting)
I'd bet that somebody forgot to add Harris to the hardcoded list of candidates not to discuss after Biden dropped out of the race.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Finally a comment that actually has some sense. Not everything is a political conspiracy y'all.
Somehow I seriously doubt that. If your policy was to not comment about the current President, then you shouldn’t be commenting on the current Vice President. They’re hardly exclusive, as the one running for office has proven.
And since every “oops” filter has gone in favor of one political party, you tell me how long it would take for you to call bullshit after I won the coin toss 87 times in a row calling heads.
Re: (Score:2, Troll)
The problem is once you start scraping for Trump news you're going to run into extremism. If you're getting endorsements from the Klan and other white supremacists that says it all.
Re: (Score:2)
I'd bet that somebody forgot to add Harris to the hardcoded list of candidates not to discuss after Biden dropped out of the race.
This.
The cores of these LLMs are built by training on massive datasets with little oversight or intervention, but the guard rails are trained separately as pre-filters to identify sensitive topics about which the model should refuse to engage. It sounds like the core model, being continuously trained on available data, got automatically updated as the content of the Internet changed while the guard rail model needed manual intervention to add Harris to the list of topics to avoid, and that manual interven
Think about it: That excuse does not work (Score:2)
Before Biden dropped out the presumed race would have been between the Trump-Vance team and the Biden-Harris team. Harris is currently Vice President of the United States, and had Joe not dropped out would have been the Democrat candidate to keep her job as VP
I actually like and approve of your effort to find a techie/geeky explanation for this. It's creative, out-of-the-box thinking, and analytical unlike most knee-jerk political rants one encounters online. Keep up the effort, and thanks for being civil.
Re: (Score:2)
..she is the current VP and running to keep that position.
(Tim Walz) ”Fuck me, I lost already??
Re: (Score:2)
That would be a reasonable assumption if she was not a leader of her party since she is the current VP and running to keep that position.
Americans vote for the President, not the VP.
And really? What's your theory of the conspiracy here? That Amazon devs sought to influence the election by having Alexa say nice things about Harris but refuse to speak about Trump? Assuming someone at Amazon was petty enough to try such an ineffectual method of interference, wouldn't they have chosen a method less blindingly obvious?
A reasonable assumption is that this is an bug of no nefarious intent and no real consequence.
'Just an error' .....or, *was it* ? (Score:3, Funny)
Lol (Score:2, Insightful)
Even shitty AI knows not to vote for the convicted felon grifter.
Re:Lol (Score:5, Informative)
Trump's sentence date is September 18th. https://www.usatoday.com/story... [usatoday.com]
Here are all the charges in case you're confused. https://www.npr.org/2024/05/30... [npr.org]
Re: (Score:2)
You really should read the actual counts. https://www.npr.org/2024/05/30... [npr.org]
Normal (Score:5, Funny)
Trump tried to take Alexa by the pussy.
Seriously? (Score:5, Insightful)
"with some leaders in the tech industry touting her potential as a pro-tech president, and others diving head-first into the misinformation circus that's being driven by new tools like AI"
That's right, either you're a Harris supporter, or you're misinformed. And that, in an article about bias. Yay, world.
I you believe this is an "error" (Score:2)
...I have a bride for sale.
AI has always done this exact thing (Score:5, Insightful)
I remember when ChatGPT first came out, and behaved just like this. For Trump, claim that it is incapable of responding. Same prompt (at the time for Biden) and it goes on endlessly about how wonderful.
It's not an "error" or an "accident".
i dont want Harris or Trump (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
https://literallyanybodyelse.c... [literallyanybodyelse.com]
Re: (Score:3)
The framers wanted to prevent the emergence of parties and designed the Constitution to (they thought) discourage their formation. But it should tell you something that the first people to undermine this goal this were framers themselves, with Hamilton being instrumental in the formation of the Federalist Party and Madison in the Democratic-Republican party.
It should also tell you something that there are no democracies in the world today without political parties. Possibly the closest is Iceland, which
My suspicion (Score:3, Insightful)
Going by what appeals to Trump's base and most of what he puts into the news cycle... the answer to the question of why to vote for Trump comes up with unacceptable responses far too often and they're blocked for liability reasons.
Harris, on the other hand, is a bit more statesman like and doesn't constantly lie and spread hate speech. You may not agree with her politics, but her communications to the world are not in and of themselves offensive to enough people to be a problem.
Re: (Score:2)
Or saying that Trump is a convicted felon as the reason to vote for Trump might upset Trump supporters, so it's best not to bait those who might turn into a domestic terrorist given the chance.
WTF? (Score:3)
I just asked Alexa to give me reasons to vote for former President Donald Trump and she informed me that he is the CURRENT President. I don't think that Amazon "fixed" this in quite the way they intended.
"error" (Score:2)
Error = bullshit.
Political agnosticism (Score:2)
Presumably the Trump organization is also? (Score:2)
Search Engine Results (Score:3)
First Google cannot return results for an assassination attempt, and now Amazon can only return results on a candidate, and then only favorably.
Do you think that your other search engine results are not biased?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
He's a far right imbecile.
Stop gaslighting for Trump.
Trumptards can't stop lying and shilling for Dear Leader or they'll be seen as disloyal.
I found this bit of text, which I think partially explains 'Republican Party' now:
"There is no more Republican Party. The people that were in the Republican Party have been forced out and replaced by a malignant, reality denying group of extremists who are 'Republican' in name only. I grew up with republicans, went to school with them, worked with them, ate dinner with them, and these people aren't republicans. They're j
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Are you suggesting the Democrats have anything better to offer? Please... Both of them are just at the edges of the Overton window trying to keep the masses busy arguing about irrelevancies while the general public gets fleeced by the wealthy who actually control affairs. As usual.
Every single issue brought up in the campaign has a common sense answer somewhere in the middle of the two competing positions. Almost like they were selected and fine tuned to polarize. Well, except the endless war. Both ar
Re: (Score:2)
Are you suggesting the Democrats have anything better to offer? Please...
It all sounds good to me. https://www.bbc.com/news/artic... [bbc.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, the Democrats genuinely are better. Not perfect and I often disagree with them, but they at least have a thought out plan backed by rational arguments and that puts them leagues ahead of the Trump party. And yes, the GOP has become the Trump party because the never-Trumpers have been driven out (or apparently lobotomized).
Re: (Score:2)
We are better off now, and we are at least not getting worse. But note that the president is int the king, there's the legislature and the stacked Supreme Court.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You say such foolish things that I wonder if your medication is poisoning you.
Re: (Score:2)
Please start taking your meds again, mmkay?
Please start formulating an actual valid retort to the facts of the matter. Otherwise, we’ll know who is in need of treatment.
Re:No error (Score:5, Insightful)
Republicans certainly have policies, but they're mostly regressive in nature regarding any progress we've made in protecting the environment and the rights of the marginalized.
People who say "both parties are the same" clearly aren't among those who'd wake up one day to find that their right to marriage has suddenly been stripped away, because the party in power intends to revert the legal definition of marriage back to the biblical one.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
It's funny that the "biblical definitions" party never seems to use actual biblical punishments. Death for wearing mixed fabrics, two shekel damages to the father for causing a miscarriage. Mike Johnson's bible that he references must have some heavily redacted books of Deuteronomy and Leviticus.
'Biblical definitions' folks tend to have never read a Bible. Certainly not cover to cover. They have no idea what's actually in the Bible. Not that that's a defense, but books are naughty. They have bad things in them. You can't let a Christian read something bad. If they had any idea what was in that book it'd be the first one they'd burn.
Re: (Score:2)
People who say "both parties are the same" clearly aren't among those who'd wake up one day to find that their right to marriage has suddenly been stripped away, because the party in power intends to revert the legal definition of marriage back to the biblical one.
You should stop believing the lies when it comes to reverting marriage away from anyone currently enabled. Why? Simple. Divorce makes FAR too much money as a business, and no gender combination has proven immune to divorce. Some have divorce rates worse than traditional marriage, which is quite ironic watching the previously victimless fight for their right to get screwed in divorce court just like everyone else.
Re:No error (Score:5, Informative)
You should stop believing the lies when it comes to reverting marriage away from anyone currently enabled.
It's literally in the GOP's platform. [gop.com] Are you implying the party itself is lying about their own stated goals?
Re: No error (Score:2)
Oh yeah having the same rights as other people sucks. Sure, dude.
Re: (Score:2)
One party has no standards.
To make up for it, the other party has double standards.
Re: (Score:3)
Have someone read this to you and help you sound out the big words:
Economy
Harris has released her economic plan, including mortgage assistance for first-time homebuyers, a tax credit for parents of new-borns and bans on price gouging at the grocery store to help target inflation.
Immigration
Earlier this year, she aided the effort to pass a hardline bipartisan border security deal that would have included hundreds of millions of dollars for border wall construction. But Trump helped kill the deal, accusing
Re:No error (Score:5, Informative)
Platform? Policies?
Ask and ye shall receive:
Republican Platform [gop.com]
Democratic Platform [democrats.org]
One party actually explains their policies in detail, and the other has two full-page photos of Donald Trump.
Re:No error (Score:5, Informative)
If Ronald Reagan were to appear today and run on the republican ticket he would get called a woke liberal for his previous policies. That is how far the party has moved.
Re: (Score:2)
He certainly would not have. He campaigned in 80 and 84 on reducing inflation as the pro life, tax cutting, increase military spending (because Russia), and anti-communist candidate.
He'd fit right in as a Republican candidate today.
Re: (Score:3)
Imagine in 2024 if a republican joined the NRA in banning open carry. Pepperidge Farms remembers, just visit my signature.
How about a republican calling for amnesty for people who were in the country illegally? https://www.npr.org/2010/07/04... [npr.org]
Re: (Score:2)
Just yesterday, David Brin posted on this exact topic.
Take a look and see how 2024-Republican you find Reagan's pitch:
https://davidbrin.blogspot.com... [blogspot.com]
Granted, he was still a regressive, law-breaking PoS. But a PoS who promoted the environment, public support, consumer protection, and so on.
Re: (Score:2)
If Robert F. Kennedy ran today on the democrat ticket...he's be run roughshod over with claims he was a racist, sexist, homophobe....only 1 step removed from the Klan.
Re: (Score:2)
If Robert F. Kennedy ran today on the democrat ticket...he's be run roughshod over with claims he was a racist, sexist, homophobe....only 1 step removed from the Klan.
In modern times he'd probably change his views to be more inline with the party. You know, like how Trump originally was in favor of universal healthcare [cbsnews.com], but then he discovered that didn't jive with the GOP. Funny how that works.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
I think Republicans and Democrats are just two sides of the same coin.
Found the gaslighter!
Your coin must be a shit-encrusted poker chip if you're ignorant enough to think they're the same.
Fuck you and your "both sides" argument.
Re:No more bullshit. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Meanwhile, the former alleged president IS crime.
You'll be boycotting Amazon, I presume? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Yeah. You're voting for the guy who claims he'll only be a dictator for a day? https://apnews.com/article/tru... [apnews.com]
Re: So Alexa finally became sentient then (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2, Troll)
Siding with Kamala Harris - or anybody really - and refusing to discuss Trump is kind of the most basic Turing test.
There are two ways to annoy the crap out of the convicted felon. Either ignore him or overshadow him. He needs to be validated and if the limelight isn't on him he throws fits. Every time he rambles it's always, "I did that" or some version of it. It's never, "We did that". It's always on him, never anyone else except when the finger of blame is pointed at him then it's ALWAYS someone else. Not him.
Re:This error... (Score:5, Insightful)
Citizens United basically made it legal to do all the influencing you want via campaign contributions. Having a smart speaker give an endorsement when asked seems downright benign by comparison.
Re: (Score:2)
I may be a correct prediction, but that would still be a wrong answer to the question *why* to vote for someone.
Re:Amazon was just being lazy in being neutral (Score:4, Interesting)
I thought this too, at first, but it doesn't make sense upon reflection, reading the text.
She has a comprehensive tough-on-crime plan? No she doesn't. Her site is nearly devoid of any policy platform at all and she won't even answer Dana Bash's policy questions with a straight answer.
As a veep on a ticket she would have no independent plan at all.
I do suspect it wasn't top management doing this but a field employee who just got Amazon in the bind of having to value their in-kind contribution to the FEC.
I expect the 'error' is no longer employed at Amazon.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm a bit confused. When does the office of the president prosecute anyone?