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

61–70 of 252 posts

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

#61

Post by moonchrome »

mrkramer wrote: post #26
40acres wrote: post #22

The market is definitely there for enterprise LLMs. Everyone is using GPT for work. I use it to provide stubs for memos and to brainstorm - but the real value comes from replace internal “tribal knowledge” with an AI who knows your org in and out.

>The market is definitely there for enterprise LLMs. Also in the news: https://www.cnbc.com/2023/05/02/chegg-drops-more-than-40perc... >but the real value comes from replace internal “tribal knowledge” with an AI who knows your org in and out I bet Microsoft is already working on that.

I've seen fine tuning attempts on internal documents - it's terrible (eg. mixing up stuff between locations/teams, making shit up)

They are now trying to build a search index and feeding it in-context results.

Honestly not seeing much value over a search index, but hey if it makes the internal data easily searchable under the banner of AI hype it's a win.

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

#62

Post by ChatGTP »

Bhilai wrote: post #6
gumballindie wrote: post #5

Software companies must be leaking code on a massive scale right now.

Not only code, I have heard horror stories of employees uploading regulated customer data to Open AI.

Whole city in Japan: https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2023/04/20/national/chatgp...

However, Samukawa offered assurances that Yokosuka intends to use the tool in line with OpenAI’s typical security policy.

Ha

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

#63

Post by ChatGTP »

croes wrote: post #58
amitport wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

one could argue that sharing knowledge was not exactly in employee interest even before AI. (it makes it easier for some junior to replace you some day)

The difference is the speed and the amount if knowledge transfer. And the junior could leave the company, an AI won't.

Also, at least for now, "AI" will never forget.

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

#65

Post by ChuckNorris89 »

croes wrote: post #55
ChuckNorris89 wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some people upload their entire private lives, personal and family photos to iCloud. Several celebrities were target of iCloud leaks and their nudes ended up into 'the fappening'. Microsoft so far hasn't been hacked.

>Microsoft so far hasn't been hacked. How do you know?

Any hacker group would love to boost about it for the street cred or try to monetize it if they ever did, or there would be at least some chatter on the darknet about it which would be reported on in the media anyway.

Nation states wouldn't, but it's safe to assume powerful nation states are already in every cloud provider, at least the US glowy boys anyway according to Snowden.

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

#67

Post by bretticus »

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

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

#68

Post by shubb »

datadata wrote: post #31
belorn wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which works perfectly fine until someone leaks the fact that NSA have full access to those documents, and occasionally will provide help to a few US companies that are seen as important to the nation.

Do you have any example of your claim about providing help?

Siemens and some other German majors claimed the NSA stole thier trade secrets related to wind turbines and gave them up some American companies. I think they claimed it was done via wire tap.

I'm not sure if this claim was ever validated but it seems wild those fairly boring companies would come out with it over nothing, whereas it is related to of the US services stated mission.

US government access to thier companies customers files has been a compliance issue in Europe for a while because it is hard to claim GDPR compliance if your vendor might be required to leak user data outside the judicial system. This is why privacy shield treaty was needed.

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

#70

Post by NhanH »

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 reality, but will take a lot of effort from their team to decipher the bullshit. Likewise there are also generated hundred lines of code with tests that are subtlety wrong.

Basically the challenge is fairly straightforward, if one side is machine-generated, and the other side is human-validated, the human loses 100% of the time. Either the machine has to be 100% accurate or very close to it, or the human needs tools to help him. As it stands, neither of those conditions is here yet

Post reply on HN