Hacker News Reader

Comment by jkaplowitz | Hacker News Reader

Agreed. One could however use a nonconfidential placeholder for the sensitive information and then replace it with the real information while revising the ChatGPT output.

View on HN

Even that isn’t enough since even if you use codenames there will be still enough complementary information to fill the gaps especially if OpenAI knows who you are and if you are coming out of a corporate network they probably have enough information based on your internet connection alone.

So say you work for PharmaCorp and you are developing a new drug even if you turn the name of the drug into a code name and you ask OpenAI to write an email about say a failed or successful FDA approval process that’s more than enough for someone to take advantage of it and for you to get fired over it too…

Isn’t this the case for all web services as well? Google doc, office 365, aws, Google cloud

Assuming MS isn't conducting corporate espionage in their customers, I'd say no, not the same thing.

If they just use your questions as further training data, the information you send to them might make it into other people's hands.

No, both from a service and contractural and technical perspective using most SAAS is quite different than using ChatGPT currently.

And overall there is a reason why the USG has their own private AWS zones…

I see, may be OpenAI should offer a plan to promise only run inferencing and not inspect the data. Or may be collaborate with amazon to serve the model on private AWS zones.

This is what Microsoft is doing by brining it to Azure.

It will allow you to use the inference model and possibly even train it further on your data without having all the inputs that are going into ChatGPT right now serve as future training content.

Essentially, yes. One reason not to use them.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com