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

241–250 of 252 posts

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

#241

Post by ParetoOptimal »

EFreethought wrote: post #168
tjr wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Employees have been prevented (by rule) from doing things that would make them more productive for a long time. For a trivial example, programmers who are proficient in Emacs not being allowed to install and use Emacs. I still fail to see why employees will now choose to disregard this particular rule , and either disobey or quit.

Honestly, "no Emacs" is one rule that would make me quit.

So would I. Funnily enough I thought it might happen at a job in the past so I've thought through the "would you quit if work banned Emacs" question quite a bit.

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

#242

Post by ParetoOptimal »

tjr wrote: post #103
redmaverick wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

simple reason. I can refactor the codebase in a dozen different ways in a matter of seconds and choose the best one to work on. I can a summon a large volume of unit tests, descriptive logging statements etc. I can also just dump the logs and it will 9/10 times tell you right away what the issue is and how you can resolve it. i.e basically you can do a lot of work in just a matter of hours. Once you taste the product…

Employees have been prevented (by rule) from doing things that would make them more productive for a long time. For a trivial example, programmers who are proficient in Emacs not being allowed to install and use Emacs. I still fail to see why employees will now choose to disregard this particular rule , and either disobey or quit.

> For a trivial example, programmers who are proficient in Emacs not being allowed to install and use Emacs.

I'm not sure how you mean trivial here, but not being able to use emacs isn't a trivial matter to emacs users :)

> I still fail to see why employees will now choose to disregard this particular rule, and either disobey or quit.

I fail to see why employees follow rules that make no sense rather than disobeying or quitting.

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

#243

Post by ParetoOptimal »

VoodooJuJu wrote: post #80
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,…

>employees going elsewhere That's strange to me. I'm employed in order to receive a paycheck. If receiving my paycheck is contingent on me not using ChatGPT, then so be it, what do I care?

> I'm employed in order to receive a paycheck. If receiving my paycheck is contingent on me not using ChatGPT, then so be it, what do I care?

I can be employed to receive a paycheck by employers that give me freedom or employers that take away useful tools.

Why do I stick with the employer that gives me less freedom? Not to mention, getting a new job almost always drastically increases the size of said paycheck.

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

#244

Post by ParetoOptimal »

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…

> 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).

When you say use it a lot do you mean typing in queries yourself or programatically and/or recursively generating prompts like autogpt?

Because I thought one day I had used it a lot by typing in lots of messages. The next day my usage was less than a few dollars.

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

#245

Post by hospitalJail »

hammyhavoc wrote: post #213
modestygrime wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think they mean using it as a tool at work, not using it in production or as a feature in their application.

That's how I interpreted it in the first place.

I don't think you've used an LLM then.

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

#246

Post by hospitalJail »

SpaceManNabs wrote: post #88
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…

> It kind of boggles my mind that there are people who arent using LLMs yet. maybe it is easier to go through actual verified information than to double check everything an AI says. I only use LLMs to restate information that I can half piece together so I can remember the missing bits (like a math proof or derivation), or to point me to recommendations of actual resources. And even those two things i am very wary of…

>maybe it is easier to go through actual verified information than to double check everything an AI says.

Wrong tool for the job. You don't ask it information questions. Ask it brainstorming questions.

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

#247

Post by ben7799 »

My employer (big tech co using AI internally already) just blocked it too. They put out a very well thought out explanation why.

We're investigating standing up our own internal model for internal use to control any risk of our IP leaking out and to be able to vet the training data.

I see lots of casual mention of using it for assistance in writing code.. we view that as fairly dangerous in terms of the risk of accidentally including snippets of open source code.

There are many risks to this. Personally my own experimentation (for coding) was pretty ambivalent as to what it can/could actually speed up. Chat GPT is not that fast and it takes time to keep refining what it sends back to you. The window of what it actually helps with seems small right now.

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

#248

Post by foxyv »

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?

My company explicitly blocks the use of non-corporate controlled cloud products for obvious reasons. All it takes is one person to post an Excel document incorrectly to cause a major incident.

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

#249

Post by snotrockets »

davely wrote: post #178
snotrockets wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Code reviews aren't meant to prove correctness. When I review code, I assume the author thought about it, realized this is the best solution, and tested it, all not happening with the models.

Honest question -- what are you doing otherwise then? Just checking for typos in variable names?

That's what linters are for. Each of us has a limited capacity to take critique from other humans, before we become irritated by it and just ignore it. Therefore, I've learned to leave things that can be caught by automated tools to automated tools.

When I look at a PR, there are two things I try to validate:

1. Do I understand what the code is supposed to do, and why the author chose to do those things that way. If not, then either the code need rewriting (because it does things in a way that shouldn't be done,) or more commenting (because it ain't obvious), or both.

2. Catch anything that is obvious to me, but not the author, or to the linter. Maybe there's a different function that does a thing the author didn't know about? And while doing that, it's important to keep context in mind. You could write the kind of code that would be very smart, but can't be understood by most, and that's code is just as bad as a very dumb code (see (1)).

If I have to catch obvious errors, than the author didn't do their job. If I have to catch spelling mistakes or formatting issues, than the linter didn't do their job.

My job is to catch anything that neither the author nor the tools can.

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

#250

Post by davely »

snotrockets wrote: post #249
davely wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Honest question -- what are you doing otherwise then? Just checking for typos in variable names?

That's what linters are for. Each of us has a limited capacity to take critique from other humans, before we become irritated by it and just ignore it. Therefore, I've learned to leave things that can be caught by automated tools to automated tools. When I look at a PR, there are two things I try to validate: 1. Do I understand what the code is supposed to do, and why the author chose to do those things that way. If…

Ah, these are good things for me to keep in mind. Thanks for responding!
Post reply on HN