> To be clear, I am not breaking any rules.
> I am simply making the best use of what OpenAI has made available to me
People like this are why you can't have good things.
> I am simply making the best use of what OpenAI has made available to me
People like this are why you can't have good things.
You're not wrong, but only in the sense that OpenAI and plenty of other powerful companies are full of people doing pretty much the same thing, and they cause a lot more "nice things" to disappear than individuals like the one you're talking about could ever cause to get taken away in their lifetime.
Good riddance. Like geez.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14511935#14514308
User stores 2 petabytes of porn on Amazon Cloud: https://www.techspot.com/news/70741-redditor-tested-amazon-u...
How is it abuse to use the feature as advertised? If they only wanted, say, 1 TB per user, then why not limit it to 1 TB per user? Only a vanishingly small number of people would even notice. The only difference is "unlimited cloud storage" doesn't sound as good in ads as "1 TB cloud storage". That's just marketing writing checks that engineering can't cash, that's nothing new.
He quietly told me “These guys don’t exist. We were never here.” I still had my TOP SECRET/SCI clearance at the time, and so I knew what that meant. I didn’t ask any questions.
About a month later, he told me why they were there. Everybody from the FBI, DIA, NSA, and some other agencies I don’t remember, were all investigating this one senior GS-whatever manager. Turns out he had filled up the hard drive on his desktop computer with highly illegal porn. Then he decided to fill up the hard drives on all the servers with more highly illegal porn.
For a brief period of time, all of the servers we had in that room were unable to do their normal job for all of the DISA employees in the building, because their hard drives were full.
I don’t know what kind of crimes they convicted that guy of, but those servers were archived, wiped, and restored from backup pretty quickly.
How is this different from using your €90 Anthropic subscription to the fullest and then discovering same usage via api would cost many thousands a month.
No doubt they are loosing great deal of money on it, but if they provide this service why should an average person not use it?
It's the advertising that makes it different.
I can eat $100 or more of cheap sushi in a single sitting. And I am nothing compared to this man. If I was running a sushi restaurant, I’d probably ban him myself.
But to do THAT you need to max out every 5 hour block. Of course people are going to start abusing unlimited chat in the mean time and start optimising the ability to burn tokens as fast as they can.
It should not be necessary to set up technical or written guards against every possible act of bad behaviour.
Instead be nice. Don't be that **ole who steals the whole candy bucket on Halloween just because you can.
I think the core issue isn't the abuse, but the very existence of a service that claims to provide infinite of something. Infinite is always BS because resources aren't infinite.
It's just like "all you can eat" places kicking out people after they've been in the restaurant for a while. We should discourage these marketing tricks because they are always a lie.
Regarding Halloween, we stopped leaving unattended buckets out because of bad actors taking everything. Now we hand out the candy ourselves. Our home no longer provides "all you can grab" treats...
We left a bucket out while we were out with the kids. No issue. Had too much at the end of the night, and had to tell the last stragglers to just take handfuls when we got back. Maybe that's a good, quick temperature check on whether your area is high-trust/low-trust.
> Do not attribute to malice that which can be attributed to really weird usecases.
see also, xkcd.com/1172 (spacebar heating)
* Lets people use whatever approach they prefer (- and if someone wants to keep their existing setup they can - with reasonable limits)
* Minimizes risk of users getting banned, including due to A) activity they didn’t know was disallowed, or B) false positives from OAI
* Heads off different future loopholes
* Avoids adding more TOS complexity
* Avoids users being uncertain if borderline activities will get them banned