Technology

59421 readers

2932 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

Follow the lemmy.world rules.
Only tech related content.
Be excellent to each another!
Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
Politics threads may be removed.
No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

407

OpenAI claims The New York Times tricked ChatGPT into copying its articles (www.theverge.com)

submitted 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

135 comments fedilink hide all child comments

OpenAI has publicly responded to a copyright lawsuit by The New York Times, calling the case “without merit” and saying it still hoped for a partnership with the media outlet.

In a blog post, OpenAI said the Times “is not telling the full story.” It took particular issue with claims that its ChatGPT AI tool reproduced Times stories verbatim, arguing that the Times had manipulated prompts to include regurgitated excerpts of articles. “Even when using such prompts, our models don’t typically behave the way The New York Times insinuates, which suggests they either instructed the model to regurgitate or cherry-picked their examples from many attempts,” OpenAI said.

OpenAI claims it’s attempted to reduce regurgitation from its large language models and that the Times refused to share examples of this reproduction before filing the lawsuit. It said the verbatim examples “appear to be from year-old articles that have proliferated on multiple third-party websites.” The company did admit that it took down a ChatGPT feature, called Browse, that unintentionally reproduced content.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[+] [email protected] -22 points 10 months ago (2 children)

New York Times has an extremely bad reputation lately. It's basically a tabloid these days, so it's possible.

It's weird that they didn't share the full conversation. I thought they provided evidence for the claim in the form of the full conversation of instead of their classic "trust me bro, the Ai really said it, no I don't want to share the evidence."

[–] [email protected] 28 points 10 months ago (3 children)

Oh please, NYTimes is still one of the premier papers out there. There are mistakes but they're no where near a tabloid, and they DO actually go out of their way to update and correct articles ... to the point I'm pretty sure I've even seen them use push notifications for corrections.

Unless of course that is, you want to listen to Trump and his deluge of alternative facts...

[–] [email protected] 7 points 10 months ago (1 children)

I’m pretty sure I’ve even seen them use push notifications for corrections.

They have, I distinctly remember them doing that a few times.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 10 months ago

Glad that wasn't just a fever dream

[–] [email protected] 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Yeah premier coverage of Taylor Swift being secretly gay. NYT is legitimately a tabloid now..

[–] [email protected] 4 points 10 months ago (1 children)

That was an opinion piece... Certainly not premier coverage.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Their opinion pieces have been full of garbage opinions for years. Didn't the NYT get bought recently? I can't seem to find reference to it though.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

The whole point of opinion pieces is to expose opinions that are outside of the realm of what you'd normally publish. It's supposed to be a means for keeping your readers out of their echo chamber/exposing different view points.

The times AFAIK didn't get bought but Jeff Bezos owns The Washington Post, perhaps that's what you're thinking of.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Yeah that must be it. And thank you that is good perspective. To ask a dumb question, at what point can we decide not to care about other side opinions? Climate change for instance, I don't need to see another opinion saying that it isn't bad and the science is wrong, that is pretty much settled.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

I don't think that's a dumb question, I think it's a hard question.

You don't really want to shelter yourself from other perspectives and behind close minded but you also don't want to waste time on nonsense/you have a right to protect your mental health.

The thing about opinion articles is that they are labeled as such ... it's just most people don't really know the difference.

[–] [email protected] 21 points 10 months ago

And OpenAI hasn't exactly been open since GPT-3.