It’s pretty interesting article. I actually dropped my Chad GPT subscription a few years ago and switched a locally hosting my own Ollama server for like privacy concerns.
I’m still going to continue to use my locally hosted large language models but I don’t know, its interesting to know that chat gpt seems to not care about user data except for training or making money.
Ollama is better than GPT, but worse than basically every other local solution (from a performance perspective and an ethical perspective). I was annoyed when I found out, but made the switch to something llama based.
AI companies cannot be allowed to hide behind “it wasn’t me!” defences.
And yet watch as they do exactly that for the next several decades.
Ethics and companies rarely go together. The mindset is: win, whatever the cost.
There’s a real nice doom scenario playing out right now; at least as long as capitalism’s kept alive and well.
SHAGGY
Why should OpenAI be held responsible for this particular incident? Because their LLM recommended the user to contact a suicide hotline when he expressed his suicidal thoughts? Because it correctly answered his questions and confirmed that the safety of his shotgun was off? Don’t get me wrong, I like having companies held accountable as much as the next guy, but why don’t you ask the gun production companies to be held responsible as well? Hell, we might as well be asking for his parents to be held accountable for their offspring’s actions.
Yes, LLM’s can, with or without external manipulation, provide information about sensitive subjects, which can then be consumed by vulnerable individuals who may act in a harmful way. That individual would have acted and reached the same outcome not matter if the LLM would have existed or not, because there are multiple options to using an LMM to gather information.
What are the realistic expectations of OpenAI to implement to prevent these things, that doesn’t automatically mean stricter restrictions to the user data privacy and further strengthen the control of citizens (thanks to the flourishing relationship between OpenAI and the American government)?
I thought it was interesting how the article said that if ChatGPT was a human it would have been charged with murder.
Obviously I don’t think ChatGPT is a human but it does raise questions about the kind of laws regarding LLM and the companies behind them.
Like at what point do AI companies have a responsibility to step in in these scenarios?
They don’t. It’s not human.
One expectation could be to recognize that ai psychosis is a thing and cut people off if they’re going down that road.
That could work. But who will define where the company should step in, at which times, and still maintain respect for the right to digital privacy? And in this case, since it was OpenAI specifically which is generally known as a corrupt company, would one trust the company to not use this as some kind of loophole for other stuff?
LLM AI is just like a Google search 🤡
Such a thoughtful, elaborated response. And a emoji included as well, to really capture the feeling of being written by an adult.
Post clown content, get clown responses.
IMO the reply was exactly what your post deserved. Just because your post was long doesn’t mean it was intelligent or even valid. You posted a bad take, and got justifiably called out. Take the L and learn from it, or are you not an adult either?
If your reason to be on an online forum is to discuss, disprove, or change the beliefs of an stranger online, a good idea is to actually try.
If you’re hunting precious updoots with snarky one-line comments that are parroting the ideas of internet culture, then this is not the place for it.
You must be new here. Welcome to the Internet
Have to wonder - is there any way for OpenAI to win in the public’s eye?
If it reports stuff like this, it’s a privacy breach. If it doesn’t, it’s aiding and abetting.
If it provides counselling, it’s culpable. If it doesn’t, it’s failing vulnerable people.
I’m no fan of OpenAI, but what’s the actual win state here? Any rational actor in that position eventually concludes: shut it all down.
That was the point I was trying to make in my original comment. I don’t think there is, and I don’t think OpenAI even care at this point given their track record of bad PR. They are already in bed with the government, they can’t really be touched until that changes first.
You want to build a nanny state.
I recently listened to something very similar. I guess there’s been several cases by now. Not to speak of all the suicides.
What A-so-called-I providers are doing is the equivalent of mass producing cars that haven’t been tested for anything, then sell them for $1 each just to get more valuable data from how people drive them.
The price will rise as soon as the horse-based infrastructure goes out of business. Investor money will plug the gap in the meantime
That is exactly the reason LLMs are in a bubble that is practically doomed.
The horse to vehicle transition is actually a good analogy. When society moved away from horses, people bought cars. The companies that sold cars, if they weren’t completely incompetent, made instant profit off the sale of the vehicle. The oil companies made profit off the sale of oil as a lubricant and oil byproducts as the fuel. Companies and private individuals that used to use horses for transportation of goods and for production had real benefits they could see instantly. A horse requires large amounts of food that must be stored or purchased regulars. It is an animal that has physical limits to what it can do. A horse can only travel so far in a day before needing food, water, and rest. The amount of goods you can transport via horse team is limited by this. A car or truck needs fuel like a horse needs food, but refueling takes minutes not hours, and a single engine can replace entire teams of horses, making the transport of bulk goods far more efficient. The car can use the exiting roads for horses, less efficiently overall but still more so and faster than a horse. This efficiency and speed of transport had real benefits seen on paper practically overnight and led to massive infrastructure investment to take advantage of the vehicles advantages.
An LLM can initiate human writing patterns. That’s it. That’s all they are good for. It requires massive infrastructure advancement to even begin to work, and can only really replace communication and other largely writing tasks like programming. Although with any skilled task, even customer service, there still needs to be a human making decisions and ensuring the output matches the goals. So where a single engine can replaced 10 horses that you can then sell or dispose of because you bought an engine, an AI can replace a few people, but you still need so many experts to verify its doing the job. Imagine if every truck had to have a horse walk next to it to makes sure it was doing the horse’s job correctly.
By the time investment in roads and fuel infrastructure were made, vehicles had already been shown to outperform horses in every way. Yet LLM companies are putting the cart before the horse. They’ve invested heavily in the infrastructure for their products, and haven’t yet found any role in which they are more profitable or better than a human. So they’ve partially reduced the cost of their services and are operating at a loss. Can they sustain that until every programmer or customer service representative has died? Highly unlikely. If LLM companies fail tomorrow, 99% of the staff that was downsized can be rehired fairly rapidly. It will lead to a massive economic shift that will almost certainly trigger a depression, but the total number of humans that can still do the job the old way is practically unchanged. Whereas after over a hundred years of vehicle dominance, you’d be hard pressed to find enough horses on the entire planet to replace every vehicle in a country the size of America.
The big difference I can see is that horses and vehicles are both transportation, whereas AI and human produced writing both mimic thinking.
To continue your analogy, while there are obvious advantages for cars over horses, we are dealing with the repercussions of a car-based society gone too far today in the terms of deaths from collisions and climate change. asthma and everything else.
