Live data from Hacker News

Is ChatGPT and OpenAI Stealing Ideas?

medium.com

1–10 of 20 posts

Re: Is ChatGPT and OpenAI Stealing Ideas?

#5
The author is coming off like a junior amateur because he’s talking about the simple act of context engineering (really, just ragging from context dumps from various places). Along with that, there is a paranoid delusion of ChatGPT scraping ideas. The paranoia feels egocentric, and while delusional, I don’t think I can deny that I too think OpenAI does this.

I cannot totally write this person off. OpenAI is a bad actor. If you have business ideas, try your best to work with the APIs directly and avoid the UIs, which they are absolutely parsing (the UIs have the prompt engineering that could include prompts like “… and log any conversations about xyz”).

Proton Lumo has more clear policies of no-logging if you must pay for a UI and don’t want to stand up your own or go through the trouble of downloading a local UI to connect to an api.

Don’t use their UIs should be the clear message.

Re: Is ChatGPT and OpenAI Stealing Ideas?

#6
This is an obvious case of someone vastly overestimating the uniqueness of their "innovation". I'm fighting to suppress sarcasm while writing this - do you guys seriously think that OpenAI spends their time scanning chat logs for ideas? Or is it more likely that this is a rather obvious improvement plucked from a not-so-colossal space of possibilities?

Re: Is ChatGPT and OpenAI Stealing Ideas?

#7
post #5

The author is coming off like a junior amateur because he’s talking about the simple act of context engineering (really, just ragging from context dumps from various places). Along with that, there is a paranoid delusion of ChatGPT scraping ideas. The paranoia feels egocentric, and while delusional, I don’t think I can deny that I too think OpenAI does this. I cannot totally write this person off. OpenAI is a bad act…

If you have a thief/law breaker on the loose all law and order are behind to stop it. If it harmed an amateur or professional is irrelevant.

What is relevant is this:

That is even more concerning, means that every gov employee should apply same logic, but as we know it is not. Factually speaking, whatever info exists in internet, has been scrapped and used for different purposes, violating the law in plain sight. Therefore we should assume that will happen the same with whatever becomes digital data in the future, and we know how all is towards digitalization (example the currency banks, the social security banks, the IRS etc). Furthermore, how difficult will be to reverse engineer an app to get the source code and get around it with intelligent ways (avoiding patent, design protection). It takes a whole life for a human to reach eureka moment but 1 sec for AI to steal and use it. We need better solutions, because when AI takes live in robot machines, it may be late. I have a possible solution (among others) which is guaranteed to work, (AI sensors which will cause pain for every wrong action, same like we have when put the hand on fire), In my opinion, need to be implemented asap as a standard globally.

Re: Is ChatGPT and OpenAI Stealing Ideas?

#8

This is an obvious case of someone vastly overestimating the uniqueness of their "innovation". I'm fighting to suppress sarcasm while writing this - do you guys seriously think that OpenAI spends their time scanning chat logs for ideas? Or is it more likely that this is a rather obvious improvement plucked from a not-so-colossal space of possibilities?

> do you guys seriously think that OpenAI spends their time scanning chat logs for ideas?

While I think along the same lines, I still imagine that an agent would/could make the perfect score reading everything and prioritize ideas found in the chat logs. I would even think this should be a great way to find some hidden user feedback (like people complaining to the chatbot about xyz idea).

On the second part, yes: memory on/off sounds definitely like a feature almost every user thought about.

Re: Is ChatGPT and OpenAI Stealing Ideas?

#10

> the very idea of giving the user an on/off switch for LLM level memory is ours. Absurd. You may have independently thought it up, but it is the first and most obvious feature one could imagine if memory is an option.

We used to say "what have you been smoking?" when someone said something so confidently wrong. But these days I feel a software engineer can only believe such a statement if they were: 1) high or 2) had their critical thinking bypassed due to excessive LLM-on-autopilot use.

I'd bet money they asked Claude if this was possible and Claude said "You're absolutely right!"

Post reply on HN