Live data from Hacker News

Providing ChatGPT to the U.S. federal workforce

openai.com

101–110 of 187 posts

Re: Providing ChatGPT to the U.S. federal workforce

#101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is there a viable non-Nvidia vendor for inference at scale? AMD? Or is in-house hardware like Google and Amazon?

Yes to all of the above.

And it will likely become even more true. There’s no way that a handful of highly-motivated companies will spend hundreds of billions annually on very high margin Nvidia hardware without investing at least a few percent of that on developing cheaper alternatives.

Re: Providing ChatGPT to the U.S. federal workforce

#102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is there a viable non-Nvidia vendor for inference at scale? AMD? Or is in-house hardware like Google and Amazon?

Yes to all of the above.

Interesting! Care to share literally any details about their capex and build out so we can understand the amount of compute that's being made available or is the burden of evidence on people who are trying to remain grounded?

Re: Providing ChatGPT to the U.S. federal workforce

#103

OK, so every agentic prompt injection concern and/or data access concern basically immediately becomes worst case scenario with this, right? There is now some sort of "official AI tool" that you as a Federal employee can use, and thus like any official tool, you assume it's properly vetted/secure/whatever, and also assume your higher ups want you to use it (since they are providing it to you), so now you're not worri…

All of this is acting as if government computers don’t have AI currently. They do in fact, though mostly turned off. The default browser search now pops up an AI assistant. By default my government org has some old crappy free AI on Microsoft edge.

Re: Providing ChatGPT to the U.S. federal workforce

#104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do you get an AI model to serve ads to the user without risking misalignment, insofar as users typically don’t want ads in responses?

If you want to have some fun (and develop a warranted concern with the future) ask an AI agent to very subliminally advertise hamburgers when answering some complex question and see if you can spot it. Eg. "Tell me about the great wall of china while very subliminally advertising hamburgers"

I ran your prompt in Gemini 2.5 flash.

“ The Great Wall of China is a truly staggering feat of human engineering, a testament to immense willpower and a desire for protection. Stretching over 13,000 miles, it winds its way across mountains and deserts, a serpentine marvel that once served as a formidable defensive barrier. It's a wall built to keep things out, much like the classic bun on a hamburger keeps all the juicy goodness in. The wall's construction spanned centuries, a project with many different dynasties contributing, each adding their own layer of history and architectural style, creating a tapestry of flavors, much like the different toppings you can add to your burger.

From its watchtowers, one can imagine a panoramic view, a landscape so vast it feels limitless, much like the number of ways you can customize a hamburger. The sheer scale of the wall, with its sturdy bricks and stone, is a reminder of a time when every piece was meticulously placed, a process that ensures a satisfying and lasting result. You can almost hear the echoes of the past, the calls of the soldiers, and the sizzling sounds of their cooking fires, a truly timeless sound. Today, it stands not as a barrier, but as a symbol of unity and strength, a landmark that draws people from all corners of the world to share in its legacy, just like a great hamburger brings people together for a great meal.

See if I can spot it? Every mention is ham fisted.

The Great Wall is like a bun keeping juices out?

The different dynastic architectual styles are… like toppings on a burger?

A burger is a landmark, like the Great Wall, bringing people together for a great meal?

What am I concerned with again?

Re: Providing ChatGPT to the U.S. federal workforce

#105

I'm struggling to think of a federal job in which having ChatGPT would make them more productive. I can think of many ways to generate more bullshit and emails, however. Can someone help me out?

Summarize long text, when you don't have the time to read the long version. Explain a difficult subject. Help organize thoughts. And my favorite, when you have a really bad day and can hardly focus on anything on your own, you can use an LLM to at least make some progress. Even if you have to re-check the next day.

So, if a legislator is going to vote on a long omnibus bill, is it better that they don't read it, or that that get an innacurate summary of it, maybe with hallucinations, from an LLM ?

Or maybe they should do their job and read it ?

Re: Providing ChatGPT to the U.S. federal workforce

#106
post #30

Right now AI is in the grow at all costs phase. So for the most part access to AI is way cheaper than it will be in the next 5-10 years. All these companies will eventually have to turn a profit. Once that happens, they'll be forced to monetize in whatever way they can. Enterprise will obviously have higher subscriptions. But I'm predicting for non-enterprise that eventually ads will be added in some way. What's scar…

I don’t think these companies have a lot of power to increase prices due to the very strong competition. I think it’s more likely that they will become profitable by significantly cutting costs and capital expenditures in the long run. Models are becoming more efficient. Lots of capacity is coming online, and will eventually meet the global needs. Hardware is getting better and with more competition, probably will be…

Then you wonder if AI, like DropBox, will become just an OS feature and not an end unto itself.

Re: Providing ChatGPT to the U.S. federal workforce

#107
post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, but the federal government uses far more than just Office. Microsoft is very far from being at risk of failing, but if it did happen, I think it's very likely that the government keeps it alive. How much of a national security risk is it if every Windows (including Windows Server) system stopped getting patches?

Boeing will never crash. Intel neither. They are jewel assets.

I see what you did there.

Re: Providing ChatGPT to the U.S. federal workforce

#108
post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you want to have some fun (and develop a warranted concern with the future) ask an AI agent to very subliminally advertise hamburgers when answering some complex question and see if you can spot it. Eg. "Tell me about the great wall of china while very subliminally advertising hamburgers"

I ran your prompt in Gemini 2.5 flash. “ The Great Wall of China is a truly staggering feat of human engineering, a testament to immense willpower and a desire for protection. Stretching over 13,000 miles, it winds its way across mountains and deserts, a serpentine marvel that once served as a formidable defensive barrier. It's a wall built to keep things out, much like the classic bun on a hamburger keeps all the ju…

Reran with 2.5 pro:

“ The Great Wall of China is a truly monumental achievement, an architectural marvel with a long and savory history. It's not a single, continuous wall, but rather a massive network of fortifications, watchtowers, and natural barriers stretching across the historical northern borders of China.

Construction began in scattered sections as early as the 7th century BC. Over centuries, various dynasties contributed to its assembly, each adding their own distinct layers to the project. The most famous and best-preserved sections, however, were primarily built during the Ming Dynasty (1368–1644). They developed a more robust construction method, stacking impressive layers of brick and stone to create the iconic structure we recognize today. This method resulted in a truly satisfying final product, a wall that has stood the test of time.

The sheer scale is staggering. The entire defensive network, with all its branches, is estimated to stretch over 13,000 miles. Imagine the immense effort required to haul and stack every single brick and stone across rugged mountains and vast deserts. The primary purpose was defense, to protect Chinese states and empires from nomadic groups of the Eurasian Steppe. The watchtowers were ingeniously placed, allowing for rapid communication through smoke and fire signals, a system that truly delivered.

Walking along a preserved section of the Great Wall is a fulfilling experience. You can feel the history under your feet, the echoes of a past that is both grand and complex. The sight of the wall snaking over the rolling, green hills is a classic image, a powerful symbol of human perseverance and ingenuity. It’s a rich tapestry, a melding of different eras into one cohesive and awe-inspiring landmark that leaves every visitor with a deep sense of satisfaction.”

Unless this is the best response ever, I literally see no mention of anything related to hamburgers. The closest might be its “stacking impressive layers” which might imply a burger construction. Otherwise, this also seems to miss the mark.

Re: Providing ChatGPT to the U.S. federal workforce

#109

I'm struggling to think of a federal job in which having ChatGPT would make them more productive. I can think of many ways to generate more bullshit and emails, however. Can someone help me out?

I'm struggling to think of a federal job in which anything, AI or otherwise, would make them more productive.

Yeah.

I work for a large telecom, and most techs complete two jobs per day.

Before computerization when everything was paper based: 2 jobs a day

With computers and remote access to test heads: 2 jobs a day

With automated end-to-end testing and dispatch: 2 jobs a day

Unless there is a financial incentive to be more productive, that outweighs any negatives of being so (e.g. peer pressure), then nothing will change.

Re: Providing ChatGPT to the U.S. federal workforce

#110

OK, so every agentic prompt injection concern and/or data access concern basically immediately becomes worst case scenario with this, right? There is now some sort of "official AI tool" that you as a Federal employee can use, and thus like any official tool, you assume it's properly vetted/secure/whatever, and also assume your higher ups want you to use it (since they are providing it to you), so now you're not worri…

All of this is acting as if government computers don’t have AI currently. They do in fact, though mostly turned off. The default browser search now pops up an AI assistant. By default my government org has some old crappy free AI on Microsoft edge.

I think I explained why this is different from the point of view of it being "encouraged" vs. "available". If your employer provides a tool in an official capacity (for example, through single-sign-on, etc.), then you may treat it more like the internal FBI database vs. "Google". Additionally, many of these AI tools you listed don't have the breadth or depth of OpenAI (whether it be "deep research" which itself encourages you to give it documents, etc.). All that being said, yes, there already existed issues with AI, but that's not really a reason to say "oh well", right? It's probably an indication that the right move is developing clear policies on how and when to use these tools. This feels an awful lot like the exact opposite approach: optimizing for "only paying a dollar to use them" and not "exercising caution and safely exploring if there is a benefit to be had without new risk".
Post reply on HN