> “No,” someone who works with the prompts said when asked if they think ChatGPT users know that humans are reading their chats. “I don’t think they would imagine some contractor somewhere [...] is analyzing the conversations.”
> 404 Media asked OpenAI if it had explicitly told users that humans may review their prompts in order to improve ChatGPT’s responses, and if so, to point to where this disclosure is. OpenAI did not answer this question.
No, this is why we need stronger regulations which are actually enforced and keep companies from abusing people for unrestrained profit.
“True open-source AI models” would just mean that some people get another option while the majority is still screwed. The correct solution is to improve the situation for everyone.
> “No,” someone who works with the prompts said when asked if they think ChatGPT users know that humans are reading their chats. “I don’t think they would imagine some contractor somewhere [...] is analyzing the conversations.”
> 404 Media asked OpenAI if it had explicitly told users that humans may review their prompts in order to improve ChatGPT’s responses, and if so, to point to where this disclosure is. OpenAI did not answer this question.
That is why we need true open source ai models. Otherwise closed or open weight doesnt matter, all of them read, review, use or sell our datas.
No, this is why we need stronger regulations which are actually enforced and keep companies from abusing people for unrestrained profit.
“True open-source AI models” would just mean that some people get another option while the majority is still screwed. The correct solution is to improve the situation for everyone.