OpenAI claims The New York Times tricked ChatGPT into copying its articles

GlitzyArmrest@lemmy.world to Technology@lemmy.world – 401 points – OpenAI claims The New York Times tricked ChatGPT into copying its articles
theverge.com

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.

110

You are viewing a single comment
View all comments

I'm gonna have to press X to doubt that, OpenAI.

New York Times has an extremely bad reputation lately. It's basically a tabloid these days, so it's possible.

It's weird that they didn't share the full conversation. I thought they provided evidence for the claim in the form of the full conversation of instead of their classic "trust me bro, the Ai really said it, no I don't want to share the evidence."

Oh please, NYTimes is still one of the premier papers out there. There are mistakes but they're no where near a tabloid, and they DO actually go out of their way to update and correct articles ... to the point I'm pretty sure I've even seen them use push notifications for corrections.

Unless of course that is, you want to listen to Trump and his deluge of alternative facts...

I’m pretty sure I’ve even seen them use push notifications for corrections.

They have, I distinctly remember them doing that a few times.

Yeah premier coverage of Taylor Swift being secretly gay. NYT is legitimately a tabloid now..

That was an opinion piece... Certainly not premier coverage.

Their opinion pieces have been full of garbage opinions for years. Didn't the NYT get bought recently? I can't seem to find reference to it though.

The whole point of opinion pieces is to expose opinions that are outside of the realm of what you'd normally publish. It's supposed to be a means for keeping your readers out of their echo chamber/exposing different view points.

The times AFAIK didn't get bought but Jeff Bezos owns The Washington Post, perhaps that's what you're thinking of.

Yeah that must be it. And thank you that is good perspective. To ask a dumb question, at what point can we decide not to care about other side opinions? Climate change for instance, I don't need to see another opinion saying that it isn't bad and the science is wrong, that is pretty much settled.

I don't think that's a dumb question, I think it's a hard question.

You don't really want to shelter yourself from other perspectives and behind close minded but you also don't want to waste time on nonsense/you have a right to protect your mental health.

The thing about opinion articles is that they are labeled as such ... it's just most people don't really know the difference.