Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

ChatGPT Enterprise

openai.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 532 posts

Re: ChatGPT Enterprise

#171

Post by blowski »

dahwolf wrote: post #161
brabel wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the real feature is this: " We do not train on your business data or conversations, and our models don’t learn from your usage. ChatGPT Enterprise is also SOC 2 compliant and all conversations are encrypted in transit and at rest. "

It's exactly opposite. The entire point of an enterprise option would be that you DO train it on corporate data, securely. So the #1 feature is actually missing, yet is announced as in the works.

Coca Cola doesn’t want to train a model that can be bought by Pepsi.

Re: ChatGPT Enterprise

#172

Post by ttul »

saliagato wrote: post #4

I thought that Microsoft was busy with enterprises yet OpenAI announces a product for enterprises. I have a feeling that the two do not get along

Microsoft is primarily a mid-market company. They definitely sell to enterprise as well, but what makes Microsoft truly great is their ability to sell at enormous scale through a vast network of partners to every SMB in the world.

OpenAI is a tiny company, relative to Microsoft. They can’t afford to build a giant partner network. At best, they can offer a forum-supported set of products for the little guys and a richly supported enterprise suite. But the middle market will be Microsoft’s to own, as they always do.

Re: ChatGPT Enterprise

#173

Post by dangerwill »

Given our industry's long history of lying about data retention and usage and openai's opaqueness and Sam Altman's specific sleaziness I wouldn't trust this privacy statement one bit. But I know the statement will be enough for corporate "due diligence".

Which is a shame because an actual audit of the live training data of these systems could be possible, albeit imperfect. Setup an independent third party audit firm that gets daily access to a randomly chosen slice of the training data and check its source. Something along those lines would give some actual teeth to these statements about data privacy or data segmentation.

Re: ChatGPT Enterprise

#174

Post by idopmstuff »

irrational wrote: post #162

> The 80% statistic refers to the percentage of Fortune 500 companies with registered ChatGPT accounts, as determined by accounts associated with corporate email domains. Yeah... I have no doubt that people at my Fortune 100 company tried it out with their corporate email domains. We have about 80,000 employees, so it seems nearly impossible that somebody wouldn't have tried it. But, since then the policy has come do…

This is pretty standard for early-stage startups citing Fortune 500 use. Not representative and fairly misleading, but it's what they've done at most of the companies I've worked at.

Re: ChatGPT Enterprise

#175

Post by choppaface »

CobrastanJorji wrote: post #157
happytiger wrote: post #105

Has there been some resolution to the copyright issues that I’m no aware of? In my conversations with execs that’s been a serious concern — basically that generated output from AI systems can’t be reliably protected. I refer to the concept that output could be deemed free of copyright because they are not created by a human author, or that derivative works can be potential liabilities because they resemble works that…

I think they're basically taking the "Uber" strategy here: primary business is probably illegal, but if they do it hard enough and at enough scale and create enough value for enough big companies, then they become big enough to either get regulations changed or strong enough to weather lawsuits and prosecutions. Their copyright fig leaf is perhaps analogous to Uber's "it's not a taxi service so we don't need taxi med…

Might be closer to the “Google” strategy, as Google also faced significant litigation with image search and publishers did a ton to shut down their large investment in Google Books. Moreover, Uber flaunted their non-compliance in contrast to sama testifying before Congress and trying to initiate regulatory capture early.

There’s undeniably similar amounts of greed, although TK seems to genuinely enjoy being a bully versus sama is more of a futurist.

Re: ChatGPT Enterprise

#177

Post by choppaface »

caesil wrote: post #167
happytiger wrote: post #105

Has there been some resolution to the copyright issues that I’m no aware of? In my conversations with execs that’s been a serious concern — basically that generated output from AI systems can’t be reliably protected. I refer to the concept that output could be deemed free of copyright because they are not created by a human author, or that derivative works can be potential liabilities because they resemble works that…

You're referring to a Copyright Office administrative ruling. It's a pretty strange ruling at odds with precedent, and it has not been tested in court. Traditionally all that's required for copyrightability is a "minimal creative spark", i.e. the barest evidence that some human creativity was involved in creating the work. There really hasn't traditionally been any lower bound on how "minimal" the "spark" need be --…

Not so much copyrighting generated output, it’s more about to what extent training is fair use as well as when the algo spits out an exact copy of training data.

Re: ChatGPT Enterprise

#178

Post by heisenbit »

paxys wrote: post #156
happytiger wrote: post #105

Has there been some resolution to the copyright issues that I’m no aware of? In my conversations with execs that’s been a serious concern — basically that generated output from AI systems can’t be reliably protected. I refer to the concept that output could be deemed free of copyright because they are not created by a human author, or that derivative works can be potential liabilities because they resemble works that…

Copyright is only an issue for creative works. If a company is automating a customer service chat or an online ordering process or a random marketing page/PR announcement or something of that sort via ChatGPT why would they even care?

If the code that implements the automation resembles too closely copyrighted code it violates the rights of the creator. But who would know what happens behind corporate walls.

Re: ChatGPT Enterprise

#179

Post by agnokapathetic »

Because it's clear as mud from a privacy perspective:

# OpenAI Offerings

- ChatGPT Free - trains on your data unless you Opt Out

- ChatGPT Plus - trains on your data unless you Opt Out

- ChatGPT Enterprise - does _not_ train on your data

- OpenAI API - does _not_ train on your data

# Microsoft Offerings

- GitHub Copilot - trains on your data

- GitHub Copilot for Business - does _not_ train on your data

- Bing Chat - trains on your data

- Bing Chat Enterprise - does _not_ train on your data

- Microsoft 365 Copilot - does _not_ train on your data

- Azure OpenAI Service - does _not_ train on your data

Opt-out link: https://help.openai.com/en/articles/7039943-data-usage-for-c...

Post reply on HN