you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[+] -9 points 3 years ago* (11 children)

How to neuter your own ability to compete: ban your workers from using the latest tool for boosting employee performance.

  • source
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [+] 6 points 3 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (6 children)
  • [–] 2 points 3 years ago

    I’m gonna vehemently disagree with you. As a knowledge worker, ChatGPT allows me to offload low level thinking and writing tasks so I can focus on bigger picture creative aspects.

    GPT speeds up my quality work output by around half. Those who refuse to incorporate it into their work flow will find they fall behind compared to those who have successfully integrated it.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] -1 points 3 years ago* (last edited 3 years ago) (1 child)

    Then you don't have much faith for your co-workers competence in wielding any given tool to its greatest utility. Using an LLM like ChatGPT to access data hardly automatically means you're also a brain-dead search result copy-paster.

    Yes, its a new interface for existing data, the same way digital files are to data on paper. Only ever using the latter is really inefficient, and stupid in a world where the digital files exist. Not that the hardcopies cant be to their own utility, or be used as corroborating data.

    It's a really good interface, if you know how to use it. This is like banning search engines because you expect your workers to be expert at everything, so they shouldn't need support tools to sleuth for data.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 4 points 3 years ago (2 children)

    Leaking industry secrets is a much bigger concern that boosting productivity a little bit.

    We're talking about very specialized engineering work, it's not something you can totally rely on a bot to do, though it might help sometimes, it's fully understandable for specialized companies to want to ban GPT internally, until there's a way for them to host a totally internal one.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 3 years ago (1 child)

    On this I agree entirely. The potential for corporate espionage because of unwitting employees using an LLM through unofficial means is huge.

    At the very least, the corporation itself would have to be the customer, so that watertight terms might be negotiated, not the employee.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 3 years ago* (last edited 3 years ago)

    I don't think being a customer would work either, language models are still on the training, noone knows exactly how users queries are used, that's a big no no for every company having to protect their secrets.

    A self-hosted instance is a much better solution, if not the only "safe" one from that point of view, we'll get there.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 3 years ago

    It's a MASSIVE security risk. What you tell ChatGPT is not private, if you knowingly or unknowingly tell ChatGPT secret information you have no control over where that information may go. Especially for a company for Apple that lives & breaths on surprise product releases.

  • source
  • parent