Absolutely, and that's why OpenAI says the lawsuit has no merit. NYT claims that ChatGPT will copy articles without asking, were OpenAI claims that NYT constructed prompts to make it copy articles, and thus there's no merit to the suit.
That’s what OpenAI insinuates in their post; https://openai.com/blog/openai-and-journalism
It seems they intentionally manipulated prompts, often including lengthy excerpts of articles, in order to get our model to regurgitate.
The OpenAI blog posts mentions;
It seems they intentionally manipulated prompts, often including lengthy excerpts of articles, in order to get our model to regurgitate.
It sounds like they essentially asked ChatGPT to write content similar to what they provided. Then complained it did that.
Every clip I ever seen about him just made me think he’s a fraud who’s good at talking. He’ll say things in a certain way to make it sound interesting, but really he doesn’t know what he’s talking about.
Since the UK voted to leave, it’s only fair if all current EU citizens can vote if they’re allowed to enter again.
Aren’t you supposed to tip for an exceptional service? Like if the food was supposed to be deliver in 20 minutes, but the delivery driver got it to you in 15? This just sounds like extortion.
No real reason for using json files, other than it's a web app build in JavaScript, so json was kinda the default for it. Definitely open to changing to whatever makes it more convenient to manage.
I haven't really picked a side, mostly because there's just not enough evidence. NYT hasn't provided any of the prompts they used to prove their claim. The OpenAI blog post seems to make suggestions about what happened, but they're obviously biased.
If the model spits out an original article by just providing a single paragraph, then the NYT has a case. If like OpenAI says that part of the prompt were lengthy excerpt, and the model just continued with the same style and format, then I don't think they have a case.