3 ms·

I work for a Fortune 100 company. Recently an email was sent to all 100,000 employees saying that nobody was allowed to use DALL-E 2, ChatGPT, Codex, Stable Dif

I work for a Fortune 100 company. Recently an email was sent to all 100,000 employees saying that nobody was allowed to use DALL-E 2, ChatGPT, Codex, Stable Diffusion, Midjourney, Microsoft’s Copilot, and GitHub Copilot, etc. due to concerns about those tools using other people’s IP (meaning our company might end up illegally using their IP) or the potential that the tools might get a hold of our IP through our use of the tools and share it with others. I’m not terribly worried about generative AI taking my job when none of the thousands of programmers at my company are allowed to use it.

briHass 3y ago
Same here. Anyone that works in a highly-regulated industry doing software (e.g. finance, healthcare) is probably not going to see much AI pressure on programmers until the legal quagmire is cleared up. There are privacy concerns with the data, the same ownership/copyright problems often discussed, and ultimately, there needs to be someone (a human) to take accountability (blame) if everything falls down horribly.
- slaymaker1907 3y ago
  I don’t think GPT is legally possible, at least for code generation. AI companies are completely delusional in thinking that they can just use whatever they find on the internet, regardless of license. Regardless of court outcomes, artists, writers, and FOSS devs will lobby congress if necessary to stop this this nonsense. OpenAI has done less than 1% of the work that makes ChatGPT work, most of the work was in producing the training data, and yet OpenAI receives 100% of the profits.
jabradoodle 3y ago
I'm not a maximalist who is thinking we are all about to be automated; but I do question the logic of "the AI can't do my job so I'm safe". Maybe the AI can't do your job, but maybe it can do the job of many people who would have the skills to do your job. If this happens and the new capabilities don't create enough new jobs, then the risk to software engineers is supply and demand.

briHass 3y ago

Same here. Anyone that works in a highly-regulated industry doing software (e.g. finance, healthcare) is probably not going to see much AI pressure on programmers until the legal quagmire is cleared up. There are privacy concerns with the data, the same ownership/copyright problems often discussed, and ultimately, there needs to be someone (a human) to take accountability (blame) if everything falls down horribly.

slaymaker1907 3y ago
I don’t think GPT is legally possible, at least for code generation. AI companies are completely delusional in thinking that they can just use whatever they find on the internet, regardless of license. Regardless of court outcomes, artists, writers, and FOSS devs will lobby congress if necessary to stop this this nonsense. OpenAI has done less than 1% of the work that makes ChatGPT work, most of the work was in producing the training data, and yet OpenAI receives 100% of the profits.

jabradoodle 3y ago

I'm not a maximalist who is thinking we are all about to be automated; but I do question the logic of "the AI can't do my job so I'm safe". Maybe the AI can't do your job, but maybe it can do the job of many people who would have the skills to do your job. If this happens and the new capabilities don't create enough new jobs, then the risk to software engineers is supply and demand.