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

181–190 of 252 posts

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

#181

Post by MacsHeadroom »

EFreethought wrote: post #166
jasonlotito wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is an option in ChatGPT that you can use to turn that off. > Chat History & Training Save new chats to your history and allow them to be used to improve ChatGPT via model training. Unsaved chats will be deleted from our systems within 30 days.

I have not used ChatGPT, so I need to ask: What is the default? Most people do not change most default options. And companies know this.

The default is your chats are their property to train on and use as they wish.

If you dig into the Settings you can disable sharing chats with OpenAI, but you lose access to just about every feature including saving chats. You can only have one chat at a time, and if the window is closed or refreshed your chat is wiped. it's kind of like if opening a "Private Browsing" window prevented you from having a regular browsing window open and also had no tabs.

For some reason, they still retain your chat for "up to 30 days" despite not letting you save or access it after the page is refreshed.

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

#182

Post by armchairhacker »

bretticus wrote: post #67
mellosouls wrote: post #59

Companies banning the use of ChatGPT level tools going forward will find the rules either flouted, subverted or the employees going elsewhere. Of course there is a duty on employees to be professional - the latter will be the ones taking up opportunities at non-legacy/dinosaur corporations that think they can command the waves. The answer is to sort your processes, security and training out - new AI is here to stay,…

Why? It’s a valid concern in my opinion. You’re feeding OpenAI your intellectual property and just hoping they don’t do anything with it. I have the same concerns with Microsoft’s TypeScript playground

It's like WFH/in-office. Some people care and some don't, you're removing the ones who care.

Personally I haven't used GPT much so I wouldn't mind, but banning copilot would make me reconsider.

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

#183

Post by [deleted] »

oceanplexian wrote: post #180
NhanH wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s not clear whether ChatGPT and the likes would increase productivity at the organization level. And I am talking about the current GPT-4, not some hypothetical AGI. From what I have seen, a large swath of usages are basically just people DDOSing their teams with a lot of words. Things like someone in a marketing team prompting for a “detailed 10-week plan with actual numbers” that naturally have no basis on reali…

All these arguments about how it can be wrong are literally identical to the arguments I heard from ignorant people between 2001-2008 on why search engines were unsafe because Google could return wrong answers or steal your data. IMO the only people crapping on AI either don’t know how to prompt it correctly, aren’t very creative, or frankly weren’t doing that much work in the first place and feel threatened by it. I…

[deleted]

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

#184

Post by selestify »

oceanplexian wrote: post #180
NhanH wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s not clear whether ChatGPT and the likes would increase productivity at the organization level. And I am talking about the current GPT-4, not some hypothetical AGI. From what I have seen, a large swath of usages are basically just people DDOSing their teams with a lot of words. Things like someone in a marketing team prompting for a “detailed 10-week plan with actual numbers” that naturally have no basis on reali…

All these arguments about how it can be wrong are literally identical to the arguments I heard from ignorant people between 2001-2008 on why search engines were unsafe because Google could return wrong answers or steal your data. IMO the only people crapping on AI either don’t know how to prompt it correctly, aren’t very creative, or frankly weren’t doing that much work in the first place and feel threatened by it. I…

Do you have any tips on how to prompt it right? How do I tell it to write code when it isn’t aware of custom internal classes and APIs?

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

#185

Post by iio7 »

Pbhaskal wrote: post #127

One of my colleague was pasting parts of /var/log/messages into chatGPT trying to debug some sshd related issue. Is this safe? He said he was masking hostnames before pasting, would that help here?

I hope you're joking here! If not, I would fire him on the spot. If for nothing else, he should not be messing with sshd debugging if he doesn't know what he is doing.

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

#186

Post by klyrs »

NhanH wrote: post #70
mellosouls wrote: post #59

Companies banning the use of ChatGPT level tools going forward will find the rules either flouted, subverted or the employees going elsewhere. Of course there is a duty on employees to be professional - the latter will be the ones taking up opportunities at non-legacy/dinosaur corporations that think they can command the waves. The answer is to sort your processes, security and training out - new AI is here to stay,…

It’s not clear whether ChatGPT and the likes would increase productivity at the organization level. And I am talking about the current GPT-4, not some hypothetical AGI. From what I have seen, a large swath of usages are basically just people DDOSing their teams with a lot of words. Things like someone in a marketing team prompting for a “detailed 10-week plan with actual numbers” that naturally have no basis on reali…

Today I was asked by a coworker, "why don't you use chatgpt." He had just asked me a question that chatgpt had failed to answer to satisfaction. I was able to find a complete and strongly justified answer within 30 seconds. But I suspect he'll continue using the tool. I'll continue thinking for myself.

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

#187

Post by dogma1138 »

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?

It is, firstly there are legal agreements when you’re an enterprise user of such solution then there are various tools like DLP solutions that integrate with cloud/SAAS services such as Google Docs or Officer 365 and lastly there are CASB solutions that allow you to control how corporate users use those solutions in the first place.

E.G. you’ll probably be able to use the corporate account to sign into the corporate Google Docs or O365 instance but if you try to sign into your own it would be blocked and likely also reported on so you might get a call from SecOps down the line.

OpenAI currently offers none of it and more importantly it openly uses the data that users submit to it as well as the responses for additional training and any other purpose they might come up with.

As for browsers these are also often also configured not to send data outside of the company and yes it’s possible. Windows 11 web search and other features would also likely be disabled on your corporate device.

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

#188

Post by subroutine »

davely wrote: post #45
SushiHippie wrote: post #2

Funnily enough our company will start to roll out an internal ChatGPT UI with an agreement with Azure on not to use the data for training etc, where we would be allowed to share internal data.

Just rolled it out internally at our company as well. It’s nice to have access to GPT-4 without having to pay for it myself (those queries and responses get pricey if you use it a lot). Super helpful for boilerplate code. Right now, we have a limit of 500 tokens though, so it somewhat limits asking more complex questions. Interestingly, our internal team supporting it has added a ton of initial prompts depending on w…

How did you get access to GPT4? Were you guys already using the 3.5 model and get upgraded at some point?

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

#190

Post by jupp0r »

Retric wrote: post #164
reassembled wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

The gets into some really interesting corporate governance issues. The cloud is a terrible bet for many large companies. The benefits are minimal while the risks are huge, however what’s in the best interest for the company is only tangentially related to what happens. It’s really difficult to ensure companies actually take low probability risks seriously. A 1% chance to lose 10 billion dollars is an easy bet for upp…

As somebody who is completely puzzled why you could think that the cloud is a terrible bet for many companies - are these companies allowing their employees to use Google Search or other parts of the internet or do they have to look up things in paper books in the corporate library?
Post reply on HN