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

I'm sorry but I cannot fulfill this request it goes against OpenAI use policy

amazon.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

461–470 of 768 posts

Re: I'm sorry but I cannot fulfill this request it goes against OpenAI use policy

#461

Post by 13of40 »

csydas wrote: post #437
stanleydrew wrote: post #408

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't expect you to back off of your take, but you should really consider how and why you came to this conclusion. If I put two different marketing messages on two different billboards to test whether one is more effective than the other, is that unethical non-consensual experimentation? If not, how is it different from A/B testing?

In strict terms yes, if you didn't get informed consent from your test subjects that would be unethical. Research has a lot of policies and systems set up to ensure that if your testing involves people, you must get informed consent from the persons before even trying to do the test, and it's really not hard to imagine why this is a stringent standard -- it's very easy to miss how "simple tests" can and often are adv…

> unethical

If this is based on the possibility that one or more of the ads is harmful, how is it less ethical than the time-honored alternative, which is skipping the study and just running the ads?

Re: I'm sorry but I cannot fulfill this request it goes against OpenAI use policy

#463

Post by basil-rash »

mindcrime wrote: post #438
refulgentis wrote: post #389

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Godwin's Law.* If you're from a certain background it's exactly as described. In academia, frankly probably everywhere but tech, experiments as a term of art require consent when they involve humans. * n.b. you really should have left it out, it was a good post through "hyperbole", got close-minded in the next sentence, then just sort of blew the hatch doors off. Sometimes we just don't know something someone else kn…

Please stop. "Godwin's Law" is irrelevant bullshit. It's not a "law" and it doesn't prove anything, or do anything except add noise to the conversation.

Right? Parent is basically saying “wow it’s so unfortunate that you have forced me to end the conversation here, I’d have really liked to continue, but it’d be against the (entirely made up, by me) law”.

Re: I'm sorry but I cannot fulfill this request it goes against OpenAI use policy

#465

Post by evan_ »

ganeshkrishnan wrote: post #67
evan_ wrote: post #6

I wonder what they're prompting ChatGPT with, and what policy it violates. I asked the standard, free ChatGPT 3.5 > Please generate a product title to be used on an e-commerce site for a chest of drawers with three drawers, a metal frame, and a butcher block top and it responded with > "Modern Metal-Frame Chest of Drawers with Butcher Block Top - Three Drawers Storage Solution" which would be a fine title for this li…

You can see in this product: https://www.amazon.com/analyze-generate-product-avoiding-tra... ChatGPT is refusing to generate titles with trademarked names. So most likely they are prompting something like "competitor product: rephrase the title"

yeah I think this is the explanation that makes the most sense

Re: I'm sorry but I cannot fulfill this request it goes against OpenAI use policy

#466

Post by mewpmewp2 »

gopher_space wrote: post #446
matheusmoreira wrote: post #360

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> rigorous A/B testing Also known as unethical, non-consensual human experimentation for profit maximization purposes.

Narrowly true, but what's the difference between this and a diner trying out new blueberry pancake recipes?

It's unethical for a diner to try out new recipes. Per OpenAI policy you need to ask consent before trying out new recipes.

Re: I'm sorry but I cannot fulfill this request it goes against OpenAI use policy

#467

Post by abadpoli »

scooke wrote: post #445

I wonder if the comments saying Amazon is terrible for shopping is due to the same ppl browsing Amazon, rather than actually shopping for the one or two things they need? I've never had a problem finding what I want in my searches. I also don't browse...and I can see how that might result in Amazon showing a person browsing all kinds of things not realizing that THIS TIME they really do want that item.

Same here, I never have a problem with Amazon.

I’ve noticed there are different shopping styles though, even in physical stores. Some people go to the store with no idea what they want or just a vague idea that they want something, and will browse the store to see if anything interests them. Other people will go to the store knowing exactly what item they want, and don’t need to browse.

I’m the latter, and I’ve never had an issue with Amazon. I know what I want, so it’s trivial for me to just go straight to it and buy it.

But other people that like to browse… I can definitely see how they would get caught in the endless see of EFUZZYA and OPANKY products.

Re: I'm sorry but I cannot fulfill this request it goes against OpenAI use policy

#468

Post by dangus »

kevin_thibedeau wrote: post #325
dangus wrote: post #274

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The amount of trust you need in a device varies based on what you’re buying. There are a whole lot of products where saving cash easily trumps having a good brand standing behind it. Phone cases are a classic example. Some of my recent purchases like a toilet paper holder or emergency ponchos are similar. Even clothing is getting to the point where name brands are barely more dependable than Amazon off-brand clothes…

AutoZone is doing us all a favor. Most people whack in an LED replacement for their turn signals and end up with a quick flashing mess that may be partially green. Or they put in LED brake lights that are blindingly bright and have no differentiation between idle and braking.

I made sure the lights had the same projection pattern as the halogens. I put in one on one side first and compared to the old bulb. No difference: they both cut off at the same height. Neither halogen nor these LEDs are directional, it’s the housing that determines the projection pattern.

Plus, I’m in a sedan, while everyone else drives a huge SUV that rides higher than my car.

I don’t see how my light system is any more offensive than the luxury cars that have the same thing from the factory. The only difference is that I don’t blow all my money on a stupid car payment or a thousand dollar feature package just so I can see better at night.

I also installed LEDs for the license plate lights which has no negative effect on anyone, and now they won’t burn out all the time.

(I did not install turn signal, brake, or high beam LEDs, I just installed the stuff that annoyed me by burning out all the time)

Re: I'm sorry but I cannot fulfill this request it goes against OpenAI use policy

#469

Post by mewpmewp2 »

CrazyStat wrote: post #444
refulgentis wrote: post #389

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Godwin's Law.* If you're from a certain background it's exactly as described. In academia, frankly probably everywhere but tech, experiments as a term of art require consent when they involve humans. * n.b. you really should have left it out, it was a good post through "hyperbole", got close-minded in the next sentence, then just sort of blew the hatch doors off. Sometimes we just don't know something someone else kn…

A bank sends out two different mailers to see which gets a higher response rate. A politician tests different versions of his stump speech to see which gets more applause. A standup comedian tries different variants of a joke to see which gets more laughs. A grocery store chain tests different store layouts to see which encourages more spending on expensive high margin items. A big box store tests different doorbuste…

Comedians should just pick one joke and stick to it, it's unethical otherwise as some people might miss the laughs and others might laugh too much.

Re: I'm sorry but I cannot fulfill this request it goes against OpenAI use policy

#470

Post by gopher_space »

blihp wrote: post #133
markusde wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The difference is, a junior employee knows that killing prod is bad. An LLM doesn't know anything.

Don't be so sure that all, or even most, junior employees know any such thing. I've seen junior employees fired for doing silly things in prod before[1] [1] Of course whatever more senior bozo granted the junior the rights to blow up the thing(s) they did should have been fired instead. That's not the way things work in the corporate world.

I like getting juniors into situations where they can blow up a db since it's the perfect introduction to backups.
Post reply on HN