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

OpenAI faces complaint to FTC that seeks suspension of ChatGPT releases

cnbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 82 posts

Re: OpenAI faces complaint to FTC that seeks suspension of ChatGPT releases

#51

Post by jmclnx »

The last thing want is to talk to a AI bot when calling a company or health provider with questions. Due to where I live and my accent, these voice bots never work. So, anything to stop these from being commercialized is good to me.

But these articles about AI are nuts, some state AI will destroy all life on Earth. That was a headline I ran across that was suppose to be signed by some scientists. I did not read it because it sounded crazy.

Also, these GPT* things is not really AI, but word/sentence parsers and probably some fancy database lookup.

Re: OpenAI faces complaint to FTC that seeks suspension of ChatGPT releases

#52

Post by blibble »

paulpan wrote: post #22

Therein lies Sam Altman's biggest fear: regulatory crackdown or restrictions on OpenAI. At this point the government presents the only risk to the progress and success of OpenAI. Sure there are competitors like Google but so far OpenAI is the leader and doesn't seem to be slowing down. The market could evolve into a natural duopoly, especially given the huge capital expenditures and technical know-how required to sta…

> Once GPT-4/chatGPT reaches a certain tipping point for disruption, and public sentiment turns from curiosity to fear, the resulting backlash and scrutiny could be on the level of Microsoft's antitrust case in the 1990s.

amongst the soon-to-be-permanently unemployed middle class there are going to be a few crazy people

once/if they realise what these companies are working towards: their employees will require 24/7 security...

I'm not sure this is a future that any of us want (bar some executives)?

Re: OpenAI faces complaint to FTC that seeks suspension of ChatGPT releases

#53

Post by humanistbot »

jmclnx wrote: post #51

The last thing want is to talk to a AI bot when calling a company or health provider with questions. Due to where I live and my accent, these voice bots never work. So, anything to stop these from being commercialized is good to me. But these articles about AI are nuts, some state AI will destroy all life on Earth. That was a headline I ran across that was suppose to be signed by some scientists. I did not read it be…

> But these articles about AI are nuts, some state AI will destroy all life on Earth. That was a headline I ran across that was suppose to be signed by some scientists. I did not read it because it sounded crazy.

I'm going to give you some advice, without taking a stance on the content of that open letter one way or the other. If you do not engage with someone or some group because you think they 'sound crazy' based solely on a news headline, you are only limiting yourself.

Do yourself a favor and go read it for yourself, and make your own judgement about whether it is crazy. Maybe you read it and your suspicions are confirmed: you do think it is crazy, but now you have a first-hand view of exactly how crazy it is, and you can think about how to react given that influential people hold views you think are crazy. Or maybe you read it and your suspicions are overturned, and you have a first-hand view of a new perspective.

But if you just say "that's crazy, I'm not reading that" based on a news headline, you're letting a very superficial take determine your information diet. You're not even reading the article itself, just the headline! And the primary source the article and headline is based on is right there, it is relatively short.

And journalists don't even get to write their own headlines, which is a huge issue within journalism. Headline writing is a dedicated role that has been SEO-ed to death. If you're a journalist, it is taboo to publicly blame your headline writers for the stupid, reductionist, and misleading titles they gave the piece you wrote, but every journalist has stories to tell about how much they hate their headline writers.

Re: OpenAI faces complaint to FTC that seeks suspension of ChatGPT releases

#54

Post by chatmasta »

ben_w wrote: post #47
chatmasta wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes. Elon Musk has killed more people with his AI than anyone else has with theirs.

I'd be surprised if there's enough evidence to determine in either direction, for that. How many used an AI for medical advice? A medical AI which said "no cancer" when there was? Does Therac-25 count as GOFAI? How many have taken an LLM at face value about some topic, and like those stories about GPS directions gone wrong, done something daft that we've not necessarily yet heard about (or if we have, the headline wa…

I think at this point we can reasonably assume nobody has used AI for cancer diagnosis. Give it a year or two and maybe that's valid. Or maybe it even is true now if some high number of people have asked ChatGPT for tips about symptoms and decided not to go to the doctor based on its advice.

But either way, it's inarguable that Tesla AI has directly killed more people than any other publicly known AI. I suppose you could consider guided missiles, but those are not really AI (although you could make a similar argument that neither is FSD).

Re: OpenAI faces complaint to FTC that seeks suspension of ChatGPT releases

#55

Post by rvz »

marcc wrote: post #2

What do they expect to happen if they win? OpenAI can't use GPT-4 (or build/release GPT-5), but the innovation will continue in areas of the world not subject to this regular? I understand that the LLM models are advancing quickly and aren't easily explainable or transparent. The models feel like magic at times. But that doesn't mean society should shut them down. This is fearful behavior and spreading FUD really. Th…

> I understand that the LLM models are advancing quickly and aren't easily explainable or transparent. The models feel like magic at times.

This is exactly why LLMs aren't useful or trustworthy for anything serious other than the niche of summarization of existing text. Even with that, you have to keep checking that it isn't hallucinating or bullshitting.

> These folks should take the time to understand how an LLM works before taking this action.

Anyone who knows about deep neural networks already knows that fundamentally they are black-boxes and are extremely poor at explainability and reasoning. This also applies to LLMs and it is not 'FUD'.

Re: OpenAI faces complaint to FTC that seeks suspension of ChatGPT releases

#56

Post by ben_w »

chatmasta wrote: post #54
ben_w wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd be surprised if there's enough evidence to determine in either direction, for that. How many used an AI for medical advice? A medical AI which said "no cancer" when there was? Does Therac-25 count as GOFAI? How many have taken an LLM at face value about some topic, and like those stories about GPS directions gone wrong, done something daft that we've not necessarily yet heard about (or if we have, the headline wa…

I think at this point we can reasonably assume nobody has used AI for cancer diagnosis. Give it a year or two and maybe that's valid. Or maybe it even is true now if some high number of people have asked ChatGPT for tips about symptoms and decided not to go to the doctor based on its advice. But either way, it's inarguable that Tesla AI has directly killed more people than any other publicly known AI. I suppose you c…

> I think at this point we can reasonably assume nobody has used AI for cancer diagnosis.

Why do you believe that to be the case? It's been in the news since at least Jan 2020: https://edition.cnn.com/2020/01/02/tech/google-health-breast...

Re: OpenAI faces complaint to FTC that seeks suspension of ChatGPT releases

#57

Post by jmarinez »

My first instinct after reading the complaint is... Fuck off!! How nice it must be for members of this so called "Center for AI and Digital Policy" to dictate - isn't that the result of a complaint enforced by the FTC - from their nice and comfortable chairs at what OpenAI and by inference, every other AI research company in the US, what to do and how. Is this the new form of virtue signaling? The FTC should stop OpenAI because of all the possible negative outcomes their AI work MAY create? Right off the top of my head, I can come up with at least 10 places in the US and around the world where members of CAID can go to right now and make a real difference to people who have real problems NOW. Instead, they want to tell and force others on what to do with their expression - yes, AI research and its output is a form of expression protected in the US (home of OpenAI) under free speech laws. How about taking a page from their org name and create an AI that can do all those things they're asking for automatically? No, that's not an option for them because it would actually require them to do more work than the complaint they could've probably used ChatGPT to write. In their infinite wisdom, couldn't they have foreseen in the last 10 years that an AI-based tool like ChatGPT would emerge? Where's their AI tool that could save us all now from the awful and destructive AI companies that are creating so much value for the world? Have they even read OpenAI's System Card on GPT-4? Did CAID even see the tradeoffs and concerns explored? On the way to reading the card they should dust off a copy of Lessig's Code, checkout a copy of The Moon is a Harsh Mistress and remember that this the US, we don't force people to do anything, engage in dialogue instead.

“If liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear.” ― George Orwell

Re: OpenAI faces complaint to FTC that seeks suspension of ChatGPT releases

#58

Post by chatmasta »

ben_w wrote: post #56
chatmasta wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think at this point we can reasonably assume nobody has used AI for cancer diagnosis. Give it a year or two and maybe that's valid. Or maybe it even is true now if some high number of people have asked ChatGPT for tips about symptoms and decided not to go to the doctor based on its advice. But either way, it's inarguable that Tesla AI has directly killed more people than any other publicly known AI. I suppose you c…

> I think at this point we can reasonably assume nobody has used AI for cancer diagnosis. Why do you believe that to be the case? It's been in the news since at least Jan 2020: https://edition.cnn.com/2020/01/02/tech/google-health-breast...

That article doesn't mention a service that was open to users (not to mention the point of the article is that AI had fewer false positives and false negatives than doctors, which would invalidate the premise of this argument). But if you want to apply the same logic to ChatGPT, then even if it's true that misdiagnoses are leading to skipped doctor's visits, it's still unlikely that anyone has died yet from that lack of preventive care. ChatGPT launched a few months ago, and it's unlikely anyone in a late stage of cancer would have prevented their death if they went to the doctor instead of asking ChatGPT over the past few months. So for anyone affected by a ChatGPT misdiagnosis, it will take some time for the cancer to kill them. And note that it is the cancer that will kill them, not the AI.

On the other hand, a "self-driving car" driving into a tree and killing its occupants seems an obviously more direct case of death by AI than a user asking an AI if it has cancer and the AI saying no. And if you want to make the argument that Tesla drivers are supposed to have their hands on the wheel, then you have to also make the argument that ChatGPT users aren't supposed to use it for medical advice.

Re: OpenAI faces complaint to FTC that seeks suspension of ChatGPT releases

#59

Post by Veen »

rvz wrote: post #55
marcc wrote: post #2

What do they expect to happen if they win? OpenAI can't use GPT-4 (or build/release GPT-5), but the innovation will continue in areas of the world not subject to this regular? I understand that the LLM models are advancing quickly and aren't easily explainable or transparent. The models feel like magic at times. But that doesn't mean society should shut them down. This is fearful behavior and spreading FUD really. Th…

> I understand that the LLM models are advancing quickly and aren't easily explainable or transparent. The models feel like magic at times. This is exactly why LLMs aren't useful or trustworthy for anything serious other than the niche of summarization of existing text. Even with that, you have to keep checking that it isn't hallucinating or bullshitting. > These folks should take the time to understand how an LLM wo…

They're useful for many things, provided the user is aware of their limitations. That's true of any tool or information source.

Re: OpenAI faces complaint to FTC that seeks suspension of ChatGPT releases

#60

Post by ben_w »

chatmasta wrote: post #58
ben_w wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I think at this point we can reasonably assume nobody has used AI for cancer diagnosis. Why do you believe that to be the case? It's been in the news since at least Jan 2020: https://edition.cnn.com/2020/01/02/tech/google-health-breast...

That article doesn't mention a service that was open to users (not to mention the point of the article is that AI had fewer false positives and false negatives than doctors, which would invalidate the premise of this argument). But if you want to apply the same logic to ChatGPT, then even if it's true that misdiagnoses are leading to skipped doctor's visits, it's still unlikely that anyone has died yet from that lack…

> That article doesn't mention a service that was open to users

So? Most AI isn't. It's not all consumer products.

> not to mention the point of the article is that AI had fewer false positives and false negatives than doctors, which would invalidate the premise of this argument

I can say that about Tesla FSD.

Press release overconfidence works both ways.

Post reply on HN