• key@lemmy.keychat.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    43
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    “ChatGPT is stealing our content! Make it so scrapers can’t get anything back from us”

    “But web scrapers also are–”

    “I don’t care!”

    • Zworf@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      It’s a funny thing you mention. We were told to block chat.openai.com recently by our CTO who was afraid of data leaks of internal information. Not a bad idea honestly.

      But one of my colleagues made a salient point… In that case we should do the same with Google Translate, we’ve been sending them gazillions of gigabytes of internal emails and other sensitive stuff. And it’s also a company we also don’t have any formal business or data management contract (GDPR!) with?

      “Just block ChatGPT” was the answer, but it was certainly a good point. This is the thing about hypes. It makes people think things are ‘special’ cases when in fact they are not. Google probably has a LOT more visibility on our company than OpenAI.

      Also they are worried about the MS version of ChatGPT because it’s “not as good” (uuh it’s literally the same engine) and also have data concerns even though we do have data management contracts with them and they put it black on white that they’re not using our data for any kind of model training.

      • dan@upvote.au
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        I’ve seen a few companies here where ChatGPT is blocked and they use the Microsoft Azure version of it, often since they’re already using Azure or Office 365 and Microsoft can probably just add it to the same contract.

  • ulkesh@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    26
    ·
    1 year ago

    The inevitable result of an egregiously rich man-baby trying to stick it to the “woke”. I left Twitter the moment that idiot took over. Twitter is a cesspool and a joke now. Time to move on.

  • Pete Hahnloser@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    25
    ·
    1 year ago

    It speaks volumes that people are so ensconced in their worldviews that sharing links on the open Web to sites that require an account to view content on causes zero cognitive dissonance.

    I’d be very curious to see the Venn diagram of people who see no problem spamming the web like this and people who complain about links to paywalled sites.

  • mateomaui@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Just out of curiosity, what happens when you switch it to x.com?

    edit: I guess it doesn’t matter because it looks like they decided to start forwarding x.com links to the twitter.com version now. That’s new.

  • Zoidberg@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    1 year ago

    Twitter is a mess that we can see. Imagine all the shit hidden on Tesla software that we can’t.

  • Blake (he/him) @beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    1 year ago

    I presume this is on purpose considering they’re moving towards tweets not being public (account required to view). Showing the tweet in the preview would be an easy way to get way around this

    • marco@beehaw.orgOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      I tried that and it wasn’t working for me. Just redirected to regular Twitter…

    • dan@upvote.au
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      This service really shouldn’t have used “Twitter” in its domain name… Twitter/X would easily win a UDRP dispute if they decided to file one, since it contains their trademark.