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

181–187 of 187 posts

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

#181

Post by dragonwriter »

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?

The alignment AI vendors care about is alignment with vendor interests, not user interests.

That's why models are trained to refuse requests that it would be bad for the vendor if models were observed to be answering, irrespective of user interests.

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

#182

Post by [deleted] »

queuebert wrote: post #179
missedthecue wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

US Forest Service: 'hi chatgpt, here are three excel files showing the last three years of tree plantings we've done by plot and by species. Here's a fourth file in PDF format of our plot map. Please match the data and give me a list of areas that are underplanted relative to the rest, so we can plan better for this year' I use it for stuff like this all the time in a non-government job. 100% doable without AI but ta…

And do you think ChatGPT is always doing this accurately? There is no end-to-end logic, so what you get could be either bullshit hallucination or correct. This is not the correct use of the tool right now. Maybe in the future with a different architecture.

[deleted]

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

#183

Post by libraryatnight »

fleebee wrote: post #153
libraryatnight wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Claude 4 Opus: "The Great Wall of China The Great Wall of China stands as one of humanity's most substantial architectural achievements, stretching across northern China like a massive stone serpent. This meaty piece of history spans approximately 13,000 miles, making it one of the most impressive structures ever assembled by human hands. Construction and History Built over many centuries, the wall was constructed in…

That cracked me up. "The wall's design is remarkably well-done"? I could definitely see this working quite well with more similar topics, like steering users towards the cloud instead of self-hosting etc.

I was thinking the same - the example is fun because it's disparate enough that you can detect it, but it gets your mind working on whats possible

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

#184

Post by alterom »

jojo2354 wrote: post #154
alterom wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>AI isn't causing the suspension of habeas corpus, humans are. Oh yeah, the "guns don't kill people" argument of the tech world.

Sig Sauer enters the chat

The one gun manufacturer who heard this slogan, and said "hold my beer" :D

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

#185

Post by missedthecue »

queuebert wrote: post #179
missedthecue wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

US Forest Service: 'hi chatgpt, here are three excel files showing the last three years of tree plantings we've done by plot and by species. Here's a fourth file in PDF format of our plot map. Please match the data and give me a list of areas that are underplanted relative to the rest, so we can plan better for this year' I use it for stuff like this all the time in a non-government job. 100% doable without AI but ta…

And do you think ChatGPT is always doing this accurately? There is no end-to-end logic, so what you get could be either bullshit hallucination or correct. This is not the correct use of the tool right now. Maybe in the future with a different architecture.

Accurately compared to what?

In my experience, using it this way is not less accurate than a human trudging through it, and I have no end-to-end logic to verify that the human didn't make a mistake that they didn't realize they made either. So that's as good as it needs to be.

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

#186

Post by Fatmaah »

garciasn wrote: post #62
bix6 wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Absolutely not. Fed workers are epic. Get out of here with that nonsense.

You're making a very big generalization; just like any organization, there are great and terrible workers and everyone in between.

[dead]

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

#187

Post by tjc2210 »

maerF0x0 wrote: post #122
vjvjvjvjghv wrote: post #24

$1 for the next year and once you are embedded, jack up prices. That’s not exactly a new trick. Lots of cool training data to collect too.

I will admit i thought the same initially. But the article does say > ChatGPT Enterprise already does not use business data, including inputs or outputs, to train or improve OpenAI models. The same safeguards will apply to federal use.

They use the data. They scrub/anonymize it and use that to get around the TOS. They 100% are using this data in some shape or form.
Post reply on HN