Is this "deep research" tool exploiting open knowledge creators, using their work without compensation?
would it be open knowledge if it required payment to access ?
Introducing deep research
21–30 of 445 posts
Re: Introducing deep research
#22Say whatever you want about openAI, they are shipping more than any other company on the planet.
Re: Introducing deep research
#23Is this "deep research" tool exploiting open knowledge creators, using their work without compensation?
Are you exploiting open knowledge creators, using their work without compensation?
Re: Introducing deep research
#24If I understood the graphs correctly, it only achieves 20% pass rate on their internal tests. So I have to wait 30min and pay a lot of money just to sift through walls of most likely incorrect text?
Unless the possibility of hallucinations is negligible, this is just way too much content to review at once. The process probably needs to be a lot more iterative.
Re: Introducing deep research
#25Look, who's copying who now. They added _the_ button!
I’m not sure I understand what you mean by “the button”. If you’re comparing this to DeepSeek’s copying, it’s not really the same thing right? DeepSeek essentially stole intellectual property by violating OpenAI’s terms of service. As I understand it, this is a copy of Google’s Deep Research
Deepseek proved that there is no moat. Thus no path to profitability for openai, anthropic & co.
Stealing from thieves is fine by me. Sama was the one claiming that all information could be used to train LLMs, without permisdion of the copyright holders.
Now the same is being done to openai. Well, too bad.
Re: Introducing deep research
#26If I understood the graphs correctly, it only achieves 20% pass rate on their internal tests. So I have to wait 30min and pay a lot of money just to sift through walls of most likely incorrect text? Unless the possibility of hallucinations is negligible, this is just way too much content to review at once. The process probably needs to be a lot more iterative.
Only if you are asking questions at the level of a cutting edge benchmark
Re: Introducing deep research
#27Look, who's copying who now. They added _the_ button!
I’m not sure I understand what you mean by “the button”. If you’re comparing this to DeepSeek’s copying, it’s not really the same thing right? DeepSeek essentially stole intellectual property by violating OpenAI’s terms of service. As I understand it, this is a copy of Google’s Deep Research
Didn't OpenAI steal everyone's data they could consume from the internet? Actively being sued by the NY Times and others for this...
Re: Introducing deep research
#28Look, who's copying who now. They added _the_ button!
I’m not sure I understand what you mean by “the button”. If you’re comparing this to DeepSeek’s copying, it’s not really the same thing right? DeepSeek essentially stole intellectual property by violating OpenAI’s terms of service. As I understand it, this is a copy of Google’s Deep Research
Care to explain how something that cannot be copyrighted and was not generated by a human is “intellectual property“? Or are you just parroting a narrative?
Re: Introducing deep research
#29OpenAI has a deep bench. I bet they pushed this out to change the narrative about deepseek
Re: Introducing deep research
#30Feels like only a matter of time before these crawlers are blocked from large swathes of the internet. I understand that they’re already prohibited from Reddit and YouTube. If that spreads, this approach might be in trouble.