Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by simbolit 905 days ago
They don't have to match the market leader, they just have to be "good enough".

There are oodles of use-cases where sending your data to an outside provider is a complete no-go. In these cases OpenAI/Google/whoever-products aren't relevant competition.
2 comments
phillipcarter 905 days ago
Part of the problem is that "good enough" can be really difficult to figure out, whereas GPT-3.5 (and of course GPT-4) are almost a guaranteed success with just basic prompting and context fed in via the prompt.

And yes, there are indeed use cases where sending data to an outside provider is a no-go. The bet OpenAI is making is that they can solve for that later while building their business on use cases where it's fine to send data to an outside parameter. It may also simply not be something they care about. In my own work I know of a massive financial enterprise that has prioritized ~30 or so features where it's fine to send that data. OpenAI is not struggling to get their money.

It remains to be seen if OpenAI will also capture this market, or if fine-tuning open models to be "good enough" wins out over time. The point isn't that, though. The point is that their models are so broadly applicable that _anyone_ can get some value quickly without much work.

link
YetAnotherNick 905 days ago
I keep hearing this, but which company has this policy? The privacy policy of openAI's enterprise(or Azure's) is not a lot different than say AWS, which everyone uses.
link
simbolit 905 days ago
"everyone"? What are you talking about?

Have you ever worked in any sector that has security policies?

Even if you haven't, perhaps spend 2 minutes using a search engine?

Here is a first page result for you: https://www.tomshardware.com/news/samsung-fab-workers-leak-c...

link
austhrow743 905 days ago
Military, banking, health care all store their data on third party servers. It's the standard thing basically everywhere to do so.

Your own link shows Samsung using ChatGPT. Not sure what point you're trying to make with it.

link
simbolit 905 days ago
Yes, they used it. Did you read any further?

"These actions clearly put confidential information at risk, prompting Samsung to warn its employees about the dangers of using ChatGPT. Samsung Electronics informed its executives and employees that data entered into ChatGPT is transmitted and stored on external servers, making it impossible for the company to retrieve it and increasing risks of confidential information leakage."

link
Kiro 905 days ago
> Even if you haven't, perhaps spend 2 minutes using a search engine?

Obnoxious comment considering your link shows the opposite of what you're claiming.

link
simbolit 905 days ago
Obnoxious? Yes.

Opposite of what I claim? No.

"Samsung Electronics informed its executives and employees that data entered into ChatGPT is transmitted and stored on external servers, making it impossible for the company to retrieve it and increasing risks of confidential information leakage."

link