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

Providing ChatGPT to the U.S. federal workforce

openai.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 187 posts

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

#131

Post by olddustytrail »

pests wrote: post #108
pests wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 dynastie…

savory... distinct layers... stacking... truly satisfying final product... stack... smoke and fire... truly delivered... classic... melding... deep sense of satisfaction.

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

#132

Post by Telemakhos »

atonse wrote: post #86
morninglight wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Will the IRS promote ChatGPT for preparing individual tax returns?

I bet a well trained model with an MCP with that fills out your tax forms based on you uploading raw documentation would probably do perfectly fine with 80% of Americans, not just 1040 filers, but even a handful of extra cases.

Back when I was in the 80%, I used to do my own US taxes by hand on paper. It's really very easy, if you just have W2 and 1099 forms. It's when you start getting into Schedule K partnerships and corporations in multiple states that you should hire a tax preparer.

The 80% don't need AI to do their taxes. They didn't in the 1970s and 1980s, and they still don't.

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

#133

Post by alterom »

Dumblydorr wrote: post #103
tolmasky wrote: post #92

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.

>They do in fact, though mostly turned off.

Well yeah, that's the entire point.

It's turned off for a good reason, and it should stay that way.

This isn't about availability in general. It's about being officially available. The comment you are responding to explicitly reasoned why it matters.

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

#134

Post by alterom »

tolmasky wrote: post #110
Dumblydorr wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 encou…

>I think I explained why this is different from the point of view of it being "encouraged" vs. "available".

You certainly did. It appears that this point was lost on them.

Thanks for elaborating again.

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

#135

Post by alterom »

jonny_eh wrote: post #129
spwa4 wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

knock knock on your door. You open to a police officer. He announces: "as an AI Language model I have determined you are in violation of US. Code 12891.12.151. We have a plane to El Salvador standing by. If you'll please come with me, sir.

AI isn't causing the suspension of habeas corpus, humans are.

>AI isn't causing the suspension of habeas corpus, humans are.

Oh yeah, the "guns don't kill people" argument of the tech world.

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

#136

Post by simianwords »

queuebert wrote: post #45

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?

ChatGPT is just generally useful for day to day stuff without having to use it on specific domains like programming.

Quick fact checks, quick complicated searches, quick calculations and comparisons. Quick research on an obscure thing.

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

#137

Post by jerkstate »

tolmasky wrote: post #92

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…

I’m excited for when some district judge provides access to all of these messages to the New York Times

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

#138

Post by SV_BubbleTime »

spwa4 wrote: post #113
tolmasky wrote: post #92

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…

knock knock on your door. You open to a police officer. He announces: "as an AI Language model I have determined you are in violation of US. Code 12891.12.151. We have a plane to El Salvador standing by. If you'll please come with me, sir.

In this scenario, are you in the country illegally? If so, how is this any different than an immigration court serving you for a hearing?

I get that immigration law enforcement is all the rage to rage about right now, but is this a threat of AI?

I think the argument you might be trying to make is that based on Kroger submitting you grocery bill and VISA with your totals everywhere else, and the tickets you bought for a comedy show and your vehicle reporting your driving and your phone reporting your location that you are 92% likely to have commuted some crime, pattern matched in a way that only AI could see.

That would be a topic of consideration.

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

#139

Post by SV_BubbleTime »

Group_B wrote: 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…

> All these companies will eventually have to turn a profit.

Do they? ZIRP2 here we come!

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

#140

Post by nitwit005 »

bikeshaving wrote: post #66
janice1999 wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'm predicting for non-enterprise that eventually ads will be added in some way. Google has been doing this since May. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2025-04-30/google-pl...

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?

They just won't care about making the product worse, if it makes money.

In an ideal world competition would force them to avoid damaging product quality, but it already appears likely there will be a handful of dominant players.

Post reply on HN