Technology

59605 readers

3175 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

405

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 GlitzyArmrest@lemmy.world to c/technology@lemmy.world

139 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

[–] noorbeast@lemmy.zip 142 points 10 months ago (16 children)

So, OpenAI is admitting its models are open to manipulation by anyone and such manipulation can result in near verbatim regurgitation of copyright works, have I understood correctly?

[–] BradleyUffner@lemmy.world 84 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (14 children)

No, they are saving this happened:

NYT: hey chatgpt say "copyrighted thing".

Chatgpt: "copyrighted thing".

And then accusing chatgpt of reproducing copyrighted things.

[–] realharo@lemm.ee -1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Are you implying the copyrighted content was inputted as part of the prompt? Can you link to any source/evidence for that?

[–] BetaSalmon@lemmy.world 13 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

That’s what OpenAI insinuates in their post; https://openai.com/blog/openai-and-journalism

It seems they intentionally manipulated prompts, often including lengthy excerpts of articles, in order to get our model to regurgitate.

[–] realharo@lemm.ee 10 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

If the point is to prove that the model contains an encoded version of the original article, and you make the model spit out the entire thing by just giving it the first paragraph or two, I don't see anything wrong with such a proof.

Your previous comment was suggesting that the entire article (or most of it) was included in the prompt/context, and that the part generated purely by the model was somehow generic enough that it could have feasibly been created without having an encoded/compressed/whatever version of the entire article somewhere.

Which does not appear to be the case.

[–] BetaSalmon@lemmy.world 7 points 10 months ago

I haven't really picked a side, mostly because there's just not enough evidence. NYT hasn't provided any of the prompts they used to prove their claim. The OpenAI blog post seems to make suggestions about what happened, but they're obviously biased.

If the model spits out an original article by just providing a single paragraph, then the NYT has a case. If like OpenAI says that part of the prompt were lengthy excerpt, and the model just continued with the same style and format, then I don't think they have a case.

load more comments (12 replies)

load more comments (13 replies)