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

Samsung bans use of A.I. like ChatGPT for employees

cnbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 252 posts

Re: Samsung bans use of A.I. like ChatGPT for employees

#151

Post by joe_the_user »

shoxidizer wrote: post #107
hospitalJail wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It kind of boggles my mind that there are people who arent using LLMs yet. Sure its not everyone, but the people who arent using them are signaling a major red flag IMO. They are resistant to change, even if they don't understand the technology, what else are they resisting from their managers/leadership team? Further, I think of the people in my life who have refused to even try it, they all seem to have a screw or…

I can't say I was impressed with ChatGPT help when I tried it. I figured quizing it on reading comprehension would be a great task, given that it is a language based model and a skill seemingly in short supply amongst my coworkers and self. After confirming that the specifications of a standard I am implementing were within its knowledge, I tried to have it explain the difference between two parts and it failed so mi…

I think reading comprehension is a notable weakness - asking it detailed questions about a long text comes up with lots of hallucinations in my experience.

But it's definitely good at some other things. Writing boiler plate texts of various sorts and giving instructions on how to do certain things notably.

It seems to mostly synthesize common knowledge rather than learning anything. But that can be very useful, a lot of people's job involves doing things like that today.

Re: Samsung bans use of A.I. like ChatGPT for employees

#152

Post by kingsloi »

How about outside of any workflows, and just one off? I've used ChatGPT twice recently after spending a good amount of time Googling around and finding nothing (specifically https://chatgptonline.ai/chat/), generalising the statements/removing any/all real data.

    1. given the following string [...], build me a regex that extracts the [abc] before [`], until the 2nd [xyz], used for extracting a bunch of info from an array

    2. give me a list of common beneficiaries, then give me 5 more
Took an hour or so of Googling, then about 10 mins to find an online/open ChatGPT prompt, and about 2 mins to implement the answer in my code. But that's where I draw the line, I'll never use an editor that uses AI in my actual IDE, or expose my code openly to train models

Re: Samsung bans use of A.I. like ChatGPT for employees

#153

Post by amelius »

idopmstuff wrote: post #110
kypro wrote: post #86

I'm not suggesting the concerns aren't valid, but I guess I don't understand why this same principal isn't applied to other internet connected / cloud software? Do these companies worry that web browsers like Chrome could leak data or applications like Google Docs? What is it about an AI chat bots that makes the risk of a data leak so much higher? Is something about OpenAI's ToS? Or it's relative infancy?

From TechCrunch on March 1, 2023: "Starting today, OpenAI says that it won’t use any data submitted through its API for “service improvements,” including AI model training, unless a customer or organization opts in." So prior to that, they were willing to use your data for model training. Every service may have leaks/security issues, but few say they'll purposely use your data. OpenAI probably should've promised not…

They could still use dark patterns and make one employee click a checkbox in an inattentive moment that gives away all the company information.

Re: Samsung bans use of A.I. like ChatGPT for employees

#154

Post by skyyler »

acchow wrote: post #145
LightBug1 wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why?

People will find insecure workarounds which add vulnerabilities.

This right here.

People have tasted the fruit of the tree of (machine) knowledge.

They're not going to let a simple webfilter stop them.

Re: Samsung bans use of A.I. like ChatGPT for employees

#155

Post by dragonwriter »

shoxidizer wrote: post #107
hospitalJail wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It kind of boggles my mind that there are people who arent using LLMs yet. Sure its not everyone, but the people who arent using them are signaling a major red flag IMO. They are resistant to change, even if they don't understand the technology, what else are they resisting from their managers/leadership team? Further, I think of the people in my life who have refused to even try it, they all seem to have a screw or…

I can't say I was impressed with ChatGPT help when I tried it. I figured quizing it on reading comprehension would be a great task, given that it is a language based model and a skill seemingly in short supply amongst my coworkers and self. After confirming that the specifications of a standard I am implementing were within its knowledge, I tried to have it explain the difference between two parts and it failed so mi…

It sounds like you were testing memorization not reading comprehension.

To test reading comprehension, the source should be in the prompt, not the training set.

Re: Samsung bans use of A.I. like ChatGPT for employees

#156

Post by fzeroracer »

acchow wrote: post #145
LightBug1 wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why?

People will find insecure workarounds which add vulnerabilities.

Then you fire them and sue them for leaking confidential information.

It doesn't matter if they have a checkbox saying 'we totally won't save your information we promise', no one should be shoveling confidential data into ChatGPT and if people keep doing so then they're a security risk.

Re: Samsung bans use of A.I. like ChatGPT for employees

#158

Post by reassembled »

tjr wrote: post #98
kypro wrote: post #86

I'm not suggesting the concerns aren't valid, but I guess I don't understand why this same principal isn't applied to other internet connected / cloud software? Do these companies worry that web browsers like Chrome could leak data or applications like Google Docs? What is it about an AI chat bots that makes the risk of a data leak so much higher? Is something about OpenAI's ToS? Or it's relative infancy?

I have seen companies have rules about (or against) cloud computing in general. I remember when decent web-based translation services first came out, and the guidance from BigCorp was to not use them for anything work-related. From what I personally have seen, this sort of guidance remains. When companies do use things like Google Docs or Microsoft Office365, they likely have some specific contract in place with Goog…

I work for a company who for a very long time was strongly opposed to employees using any cloud-based infrastructure, including OS or programming language package managers (eg. apt-get, Pip for Python, etc), opting to host their own instance if possible and disallowing usage if not possible. IT did finally cave and switch to Office365, which has been slowly opening the floodgates to other services being allowed.

Re: Samsung bans use of A.I. like ChatGPT for employees

#160

Post by kredd »

err4nt wrote: post #150
nmca wrote: post #139

My advice to anyone running a company atm - don't let your IT security folks do this. They will initially want to, and it will be a huge mistake.

Can you elaborate on why that would be the case? I ask because we've had some discussion about drafting an 'AI' policy with our CTO and though we haven't said anything officially, we are concerned about exfiltration of secrets, and the accuracy of information. I do wonder if there will one day be communications formatters like what Prettier does for code, where no matter the style of writing going in, it will come ou…

Not the OP, but the way I look at it - exfiltration of secrets can happen in any other possible way anyways, and you would need to lock down most of your SaaS software. I treat GPT the same I would treat any other Google search - don’t share your secrets, careful with copying stacktraces for weird error debugging and etc.
Post reply on HN