Frankly, if not using chatgpt reduces your peformance significantly I wouldn’t want to work with you. It would mean that you’re not doing much more than copy and pasting random search results into the project and don’t spend any time validating, vetting or testing them. Chatgpt is just a new interface to already existing data.
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.
This is like banning search engines because you expect your workers to be expert at everything,
More like banning your engineers from discussing their work with third parties. If you feed chatgpt the same queries that you would feed to a search engine you’re probably not using it optimally.
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.
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.
How to neuter your own ability to compete: ban your workers from using the latest tool for boosting employee performance.
Frankly, if not using chatgpt reduces your peformance significantly I wouldn’t want to work with you. It would mean that you’re not doing much more than copy and pasting random search results into the project and don’t spend any time validating, vetting or testing them. Chatgpt is just a new interface to already existing data.
Frankly, if ChatGPT isn’t increasing your performance significantly, you’re already falling behind the curve unless you’re doing manual labor.
Better stop using xerox machines to make copies and write everything out by hand
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.
More like banning your engineers from discussing their work with third parties. If you feed chatgpt the same queries that you would feed to a search engine you’re probably not using it optimally.
You could argue the same thing about using google. Yet you use google.
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.
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.
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.