upvote

points

by olalonde16 hours ago |
comments
upvoteby Planktonne15 hours ago|
[-]
Nonsense; the claim was that they wouldn't do anything that would mean they'd be

> risking massive lawsuits and a total loss of trust

Evidence of the massive lawsuits and lack of trust seems pretty relevant.

reply
upvoteby olalonde12 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
By "loss of trust", I meant that this is something they would risk losing a lot of users over, which isn't the case with the other lawsuits. There is a massive distinction between fighting third parties in a legal grey area and committing blatant fraud against your own users. Even if you have no regards for ethics, intentionally shipping a noop "do not train" toggle offers negligible upside for a massive downside.
reply
upvoteby Planktonne11 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
They're being sued for several issues that resulted in the deaths of users; that's not fraud, but it is against their users.

The parallel still holds, and the information is still on the page I linked.

reply
upvoteby olalonde9 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
From OpenAI's point of view, the risks are not comparable at all:

1) Extreme edge case affecting a handful of users, vs millions of users using the data sharing opt out.

2) The deaths are unintentional.

3) They probably won't lose any users over this.

4) They will likely win the lawsuits. Even if they lose or settle, the financial impact will be immaterial.

reply
upvoteby Planktonne43 minutes ago|
parent|
[-]
I answered your initial question in good faith, but it's increasingly clear each time you shift the goalposts that you're more interested in JAQ than discussing.

As before, despite your prevarication, I've provided examples of

- Massive lawsuits

- Risks to consumer trust

That's what was asked for; your assertion that it will totally all be fine doesn't invalidate that.

I know you are excited to quibble endlessly over this, but it's transparently disingenuous each time you jump to a new point and pretend it was there originally.

Consider: if your point was defensible, you would have been able to make it honestly.

reply