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

Microsoft: Copilot is for entertainment purposes only

microsoft.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 227 posts

Re: Microsoft: Copilot is for entertainment purposes only

#111

Post by wowoc »

lenerdenator wrote: post #97
wowoc wrote: post #62

Anthropic does a somewhat similar thing. If you visit their ToS (the one for Max/Pro plans) from a European IP address, they replace one section with this: Non-commercial use only. You agree not to use our Services for any commercial or business purposes and we (and our Providers) have no liability to you for any loss of profit, loss of business, business interruption, or loss of business opportunity. It's funny that…

Well, there's your rationale as to why AI cannot replace you. When sh!t hits the fan, Anthropic will immediately point to this clause. Who knows, maybe a court would see it as valid. Meanwhile, your customer (and thus, your management) is looking for someone to blame for excrement making contact with the impellers. And that someone's gonna be you.

Well, OpenAI doesn't seem to have clauses like this. Europeans are allowed to use it for commercial purposes under the ToS. (But check it yourself, I'm not a lawyer).

I reimplemented my startup idea from scratch with Codex a few months ago, just for peace of mind.

Re: Microsoft: Copilot is for entertainment purposes only

#112

Post by mcv »

sgbeal wrote: post #15

The section titled > IMPORTANT DISCLOSURES & WARNINGS Tells us: > You may stop using Copilot at any time. That's an odd thing to include in a ToS.

> > You may stop using Copilot at any time.

> That's an odd thing to include in a ToS.

Maybe it's the only Microsoft product for which that's true? (It certainly feels that way, sometimes.)

Re: Microsoft: Copilot is for entertainment purposes only

#113

Post by naikrovek »

SoftTalker wrote: post #100
wowoc wrote: post #62

Anthropic does a somewhat similar thing. If you visit their ToS (the one for Max/Pro plans) from a European IP address, they replace one section with this: Non-commercial use only. You agree not to use our Services for any commercial or business purposes and we (and our Providers) have no liability to you for any loss of profit, loss of business, business interruption, or loss of business opportunity. It's funny that…

Software in general has disclaimed any warranties or fitness for purpose for as long as I can remember. This is nothing new.

show me any that have claimed that they were for entertainment purposes only. sql server has never had that in its EULA. The GPL does not say that the software is for entertainment purposes only.

Re: Microsoft: Copilot is for entertainment purposes only

#116

Post by polyamid23 »

They should tell copilot then! It seems to disagree.

- ‚Are you for entertainment purposes only?‘

-‚Not at all — unless you want me to be. The short version: I’m not “for entertainment only.”‘

Edit: Ok I see it is legal framing to not be held liable, but can they just do that via ToS and let the tool itself promote something else?

Re: Microsoft: Copilot is for entertainment purposes only

#117

Post by jerf »

torginus wrote: post #16
everdrive wrote: post #13

Lawyers are playing Calvinball again. I have no idea why the law finds this kind of argumentation compelling. "I clearly intentionally deceived, but I stashed some bullshit legalese into a document no one will read so my deception is completely OK."

My two cents is that if it didn't, 'I didn't know that was illegal/breach of contract' would be a valid legal defense. Although intentionally saying things that contradict whats in the contract might be legally objectionable.

Nominally, Common Law, the system of law that to a first approximation is used in countries descended from the UK, has a lot of protections of that sort. You can't put "unconscionable" terms in a contract, e.g., it is simply illegal to sell yourself into total slavery in common-law derived systems. All signatories to a contract must consent, must not be under duress, the contract can not be one-sided (this doesn't mean "the contract is 'fair' from a 3rd-party point of view" but "the contract can't result in only one side giving things but the other doesn't"), and a variety of other common sense rules.

In practice, availing yourself of any of these protections is a massively uphill battle. Judges tend to presume that these common law matters are already embedded into the de facto legal system because the people writing the laws already operated under those assumptions while framing the law. Personally, I disagree and think a lot of these protections have eroded away into either nothing, or so little that it might as well be nothing, but you have a 0% chance of drawing me as a judge in your case so that won't help you much if you try.

Re: Microsoft: Copilot is for entertainment purposes only

#118

Post by nashashmi »

polyamid23 wrote: post #116

They should tell copilot then! It seems to disagree. - ‚Are you for entertainment purposes only?‘ -‚Not at all — unless you want me to be. The short version: I’m not “for entertainment only.”‘ Edit: Ok I see it is legal framing to not be held liable, but can they just do that via ToS and let the tool itself promote something else?

That’s exactly what an LLM made for entertainment purposes only would say!

Re: Microsoft: Copilot is for entertainment purposes only

#120

Post by lousken »

lateforwork wrote: post #115

Go to https://www.copilot.com/ and ask a question. You'll see from the answers that it is indeed for entertainment only. It is ridiculously behind ChatGPT, and I don't know how that can happen since Microsoft has access to the same models.

it not as bad as in gpt 4.1 days, but i am wondering if it is just the system prompt or what is going on
Post reply on HN