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

Introducing ChatGPT Gov

openai.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 75 posts

Re: Introducing ChatGPT Gov

#41

Post by aeturnum »

nzach wrote: post #19
heyflyguy wrote: post #5

Stuff like this troubles me. I am in defense tech working with LLMs and I am here to tell you the guards and fences are down at the chow truck while commoners are using LLMs.

I don't really understand why people bash so hard on LLMs. In some cases it is a spectacularly bad tool, I get that. But it is only a tool. Imagine if you have a judge giving out sentences based on astrology books. I don't think anyone would argue the problem would be resolved by banning astrology books from our libraries.

Sure, that judge is a problem, but I think your metaphor is a bit mal-formed.

In your example you should probably drop the judge, but you should also make a rule saying astrology books aren't a legitimate source of sentence guidance. That's what people are annoyed about re:LLMs. People keep insisting they are a legit source in different situations.

You wouldn't ban them overall, but you do want some kind of society-level taboo against relying on them. You can't just deal with it on the level of people who get fooled into using them.

Re: Introducing ChatGPT Gov

#42

Post by jgalt212 »

captainbland wrote: post #16
mv4 wrote: post #11

Sounds like a desperate move, now that the insane valuations, GPU capacity projections, and subscription revenue are at risk.

Probably trying to say to investors, "the government will never use DeepSeek, our moat is being a trusted US AI company who is trusted for government work" Whether it sticks or not is another matter.

It's worked for Palantir.

Re: Introducing ChatGPT Gov

#43

Post by lostmsu »

umeshunni wrote: post #25
brandon272 wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I am here to tell you the guards and fences are down at the chow truck while commoners are using LLMs. I've read this over and over and have no idea what this means.

I hate to be that guy, but here's what ChatGPT says: This expression uses metaphorical language to describe a situation where traditional barriers, hierarchies, or protections have been removed, allowing broader access or disrupting the status quo. Here's a breakdown: 1. "Guards and fences are down" - This implies that the usual controls, restrictions, or gatekeepers are no longer in place. 2. "At the chow truck" - T…

I read this and I still am uncertain about what it means. I believe ChatGPT also failed to understand this, it differs from my interpretation: GGP is worried that while people access "aligned" models military deployment don't have the guardrails.

Re: Introducing ChatGPT Gov

#44

Post by MangoCoffee »

adamtaylor_13 wrote: post #22

Oh wow, look, more shit the general public could not care less about. This sounds like a company in free fall, which isn't terribly surprising, given who is at the helm.

https://aws.amazon.com/govcloud-us/?whats-new.sort-by=item.a...

Is Amazon in free fall?

Re: Introducing ChatGPT Gov

#45

Post by topaz0 »

nzach wrote: post #19
heyflyguy wrote: post #5

Stuff like this troubles me. I am in defense tech working with LLMs and I am here to tell you the guards and fences are down at the chow truck while commoners are using LLMs.

I don't really understand why people bash so hard on LLMs. In some cases it is a spectacularly bad tool, I get that. But it is only a tool. Imagine if you have a judge giving out sentences based on astrology books. I don't think anyone would argue the problem would be resolved by banning astrology books from our libraries.

That's all well and good except that we look out and see all of the actively bad uses being hyped as the way of the future, at untold expense in both dollars and energy. The LLM is just a model that is what it is, bashing it doesn't make sense. People are bashing how it is used, both currently and in prospect.

Re: Introducing ChatGPT Gov

#46

Post by KaiserPro »

adamtaylor_13 wrote: post #24
nzach wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't really understand why people bash so hard on LLMs. In some cases it is a spectacularly bad tool, I get that. But it is only a tool. Imagine if you have a judge giving out sentences based on astrology books. I don't think anyone would argue the problem would be resolved by banning astrology books from our libraries.

.... WAT. Just kick out the judge who clearly... lacks judgment.

congratulations on missing the point of the hypothetical example

Re: Introducing ChatGPT Gov

#47

Post by sitzkrieg »

dylan604 wrote: post #37
aduffy wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I expect as much. Having going through FedRAMP before, the alternative would be to make their regular commercial infrastructure be up to FedRAMP standards, which is incredibly onerous (things like change tracking, DR, US Citizen access only to production systems, etc.)

> US Citizen access only to production systems, What if the employees building the thing are not US citizens?

now now, no one wants to call out the unwillingness to pay fair labor cost of the sausage machine :^)

Re: Introducing ChatGPT Gov

#48

Post by adamtaylor_13 »

MangoCoffee wrote: post #44
adamtaylor_13 wrote: post #22

Oh wow, look, more shit the general public could not care less about. This sounds like a company in free fall, which isn't terribly surprising, given who is at the helm.

https://aws.amazon.com/govcloud-us/?whats-new.sort-by=item.a... Is Amazon in free fall?

Hooooboy. Amazon and OpenAI aren’t even playing the same game. This is comparing Apples and Carbon nanotubes.

Re: Introducing ChatGPT Gov

#49

Post by hfgjbcgjbvg »

jgalt212 wrote: post #42
captainbland wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Probably trying to say to investors, "the government will never use DeepSeek, our moat is being a trusted US AI company who is trusted for government work" Whether it sticks or not is another matter.

It's worked for Palantir.

For some short term definition of “worked”

Re: Introducing ChatGPT Gov

#50

Post by hfgjbcgjbvg »

lostmsu wrote: post #43
umeshunni wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I hate to be that guy, but here's what ChatGPT says: This expression uses metaphorical language to describe a situation where traditional barriers, hierarchies, or protections have been removed, allowing broader access or disrupting the status quo. Here's a breakdown: 1. "Guards and fences are down" - This implies that the usual controls, restrictions, or gatekeepers are no longer in place. 2. "At the chow truck" - T…

I read this and I still am uncertain about what it means. I believe ChatGPT also failed to understand this, it differs from my interpretation: GGP is worried that while people access "aligned" models military deployment don't have the guardrails.

Basically he’s worried about gen pop having access to LLMs thinking only govts should have access to the technology for some strange reason. Probably because he works in defence contracting so he benefits directly from having that stance.
Post reply on HN