5 ms·

Can't stand NYT ever since they subpoenaed for millions of chat logs from OpenAI, trashing user privacy for their own goals on a massive scale.

by visarga 3mo ago

eddyfromtheblok 3mo ago
agree. more HN stories here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48865019 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48865019 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48864887 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48864887
wilsonnb3 3mo ago
What user privacy? There would be no chat logs to subpoena if users had privacy.
threetonesun 3mo ago
What were their "own goals", exactly? Why did you ever assume your chat logs were private on OpenAI?
smotched 3mo ago
So you're okay with a data hoarding company building AGI having your data but not some journalists having <1% of it?
- CamperBob2 3mo ago
  ...Yeah?
  - smotched 3mo ago
    why are you okay with the former
    - CamperBob2 3mo ago
      Because I'm impressed as hell with what the labs have done with the data they have, and I really couldn't care less how they got it. I've already contributed to their training set inadvertently by publishing open-source software and documentation over the years, and as long as they keep delivering the bang-for-the-buck that I'm seeing now with Fable and Sol, they are welcome to keep doing what they've been doing. More power to them. Corporate news media defending copyright maximalism with their dying breath, on the other hand... not so much. Continued progress in AI (and my continued access to it) is far more important than copyright law.
      - smotched 3mo ago
        you may be fine with these companies using your data and selling it back to you but you're also saying its not okay for others to not want to participate. basically people that actually create something of value should be forced to give up that value (not counting your shitty public repo that you call "OSS"). you don't even think they should pay a fair value to train on it, as long as you get create your shitty vibe coded slop, you don't care.
        CamperBob2 3mo ago
        Correct, I don't care. The data they are "selling back to me" has been transformed and amplified beyond recognition in 99.999% of cases. Copyright is not a natural right. It's something we pulled out of our asses a few hundred years ago to make a few people rich. It can go right back where it came from, if it's going to impede progress for the rest. Don't fight AI, fight for access to it.
        smotched 3mo ago
        asking these trillion dollar companies to pay a tiny portion of their valuation for the data they're using to profit is not "fighting AI". with your copyright vision do you think your favorite writers or artists would be putting blood sweat and tears into their work if the publisher just steals it and sells it without giving them a dime?
tzs 3mo ago
The NYT doesn't get to see the logs. They will only be seen by the attorneys handling the lawsuit and possibly expert witnesses they hire, who all are under strong NDAs.

Can't stand NYT ever since they subpoenaed for millions of chat logs from OpenAI, trashing user privacy for their own goals on a massive scale.

by visarga 3mo ago

Can't stand NYT ever since they subpoenaed for millions of chat logs from OpenAI, trashing user privacy for their own goals on a massive scale.

eddyfromtheblok 3mo ago

agree. more HN stories here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48865019 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48865019 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48864887 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48864887

wilsonnb3 3mo ago

What user privacy? There would be no chat logs to subpoena if users had privacy.

threetonesun 3mo ago

What were their "own goals", exactly? Why did you ever assume your chat logs were private on OpenAI?

smotched 3mo ago

So you're okay with a data hoarding company building AGI having your data but not some journalists having <1% of it?

CamperBob2 3mo ago
...Yeah?
- smotched 3mo ago
  why are you okay with the former
  - CamperBob2 3mo ago
    Because I'm impressed as hell with what the labs have done with the data they have, and I really couldn't care less how they got it. I've already contributed to their training set inadvertently by publishing open-source software and documentation over the years, and as long as they keep delivering the bang-for-the-buck that I'm seeing now with Fable and Sol, they are welcome to keep doing what they've been doing. More power to them. Corporate news media defending copyright maximalism with their dying breath, on the other hand... not so much. Continued progress in AI (and my continued access to it) is far more important than copyright law.
    - smotched 3mo ago
      you may be fine with these companies using your data and selling it back to you but you're also saying its not okay for others to not want to participate. basically people that actually create something of value should be forced to give up that value (not counting your shitty public repo that you call "OSS"). you don't even think they should pay a fair value to train on it, as long as you get create your shitty vibe coded slop, you don't care.
      - CamperBob2 3mo ago
        Correct, I don't care. The data they are "selling back to me" has been transformed and amplified beyond recognition in 99.999% of cases. Copyright is not a natural right. It's something we pulled out of our asses a few hundred years ago to make a few people rich. It can go right back where it came from, if it's going to impede progress for the rest. Don't fight AI, fight for access to it.
        smotched 3mo ago
        asking these trillion dollar companies to pay a tiny portion of their valuation for the data they're using to profit is not "fighting AI". with your copyright vision do you think your favorite writers or artists would be putting blood sweat and tears into their work if the publisher just steals it and sells it without giving them a dime?

tzs 3mo ago

The NYT doesn't get to see the logs. They will only be seen by the attorneys handling the lawsuit and possibly expert witnesses they hire, who all are under strong NDAs.