你與 ChatGPT 的對話竟然可 Google 得到？OpenAI：功能已撤回
AI 已成許多人日常生活與工作的必備工具，例如找資料找建議，問食譜，甚至是修飾電郵、履歷等，因此難免會向 AI 透露不同的個人資料。不過有機會透露個資的話要小心，因最近 OpenAI 就被爆出用戶與 AI 的對話內容，原來可經 Goolge 搜尋得到。
廣告
廣告
近日 TechCrunch 報導有 ChatGPT 用戶發現可透過 Google 或 Bing 搜尋引擎，輸入指定ChatGPT的網域名稱（https://chatgpt.com/share），就可找到陌生人與 ChatGPT 的對話，由於不少人都會利用 ChatGPT 去修飾履歷，因此個人資料就有機會洩漏。報導中就到其中一個例子是一名用戶要求 ChatGPT 幫忙修飾履歷以方便申請工作，而且從對話紀錄中其實可找出該名用戶的 LinkedIn 資料。這個漏洞被揭露後，OpenAI 指出聊天紀錄之所以被搜尋得到，是一項實驗的一部分，測試如何讓用戶更容易分享有用的對話，但同時仍保有控制權。其實 ChatGPT 的對話內容預設是不公開，除非用戶自行打開分享功能，而且是因為 Google 對公開的連結其索引規範而引致。不過為了安全起見，OpenAI 已立刻撤回這項功能。
更多內容：
緊貼最新科技資訊、網購優惠，追隨 Yahoo Tech 各大社交平台！
🎉📱 Tech Facebook：https://www.facebook.com/yahootechhk
廣告
廣告
🎉📱 Tech Instagram：https://www.instagram.com/yahootechhk/
🎉📱 Tech WhatsApp 社群：https://chat.whatsapp.com/Dg3fiiyYf3yG2mgts4Mii8
🎉📱 Tech WhatsApp 頻道：https://whatsapp.com/channel/0029Va91dmR545urVCpQwq2D
🎉📱 Tech Telegram 頻道：https://t.me/yahootechhk
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Forbes
4 minutes ago
- Forbes
Office Hellscapes And AI Process Mapping
Why are human workplaces so disorganized? In some ways, it's a question people have been asking themselves ever since the first cubicle dwellers rose up from the primordial swamp - whenever that was. We know that larger systems tend to be disordered, especially if they're administrated by humans. Just go read Joseph Conrad's Heart of Darkness, and it might remind you of the modern office – people and products and materials strewn about a gigantic footprint, with very little centralized control. You get the same kind of idea reading the most recent piece by Ethan Mollick on the site where he posts his essays, One Useful Thing. I always follow his posts, interested in his emerging take on the technologies that are so new to all of us. Mollick has MIT ties, and an excellent track record looking at the AI revolution from a fresh perspective. The Office Dilemma Human wothis most recent piece, he talks about process mapping and how AI can help people to sort through the disorganization of a business. Think of a company with 100 or more employees, and probably a dozen locations. The first thing you tend to find is that sense of disorder. Mollick talks about a 'Garbage Can' principle, which posits that most businesses are a collection of disparate processes thrown into a large, disorganized bin. To me, you could use the analogy of what programmers used to call 'DLL hell' in the earlier days of the Internet. DLLs are digital libraries. Their application was often chaotic and disordered. There were dependencies that would flummox even the most seasoned engineers, because things were complicated and chaotic. That's what a large company is often like. Everyone for Themselves Mollick also pointed to some numbers that I've seen in various studies, and presented at conferences where we've talked about AI over the past year. His number was 43% – the number of employees who are using AI in the workplace. But as Mollick points out, and as I've heard before, most of them are using AI in personal ways. The use of the tools is not ordered across an organization – it's piecemeal. It's people using an AI tool like you would use a hammer, or a saw, or a drill, or a lathe --- largely in an unsupervised way. However, in general, it seems AI is largely catching on, especially when it comes to product development. You have resources like this one from the Texas Workforce Commission, referencing thousands of AI jobs. So even if there's not much centralized AI in the boardroom, there is abundant AI in business processes. It's just that those processes may or may not be unified. The Bitter Lesson Then Mollick references something called the 'Bitter lesson' that's attributed to Robert Sutton in 2019. It's the idea that AI will prove to be cognitively superior to humans without a lot of poking and prodding – but given enough time and compute, the system will find its own way to solve problems. That phrase, problem solving, is what people have been saying is the unique province of humans. It's the idea that AI can do the data-crunching, but people are still doing the creative problem-solving. Well, that bastion of human ingenuity doesn't seem that safe anymore. Mollick references the early days of chess machine evolution, where eventually Deep Blue beat Kasparov. He notes that there are two ways to go about this – you can program in innumerable chess rules, and have the system sort through them and apply them, or you can just show the system thousands of chess games, and it will make those connections on its own. Back to Machine Learning Principles Reading through this, I was reminded of the early days of machine learning, where people talked a good bit about supervised versus unsupervised learning. We often used the analogy of fruit in a digital software program enhanced with machine learning properties. Supervised learning would be labeling each fruit with its own tag – banana – apple - or grapes. The program would then learn to correlate between its training data and new real-world data. That comparison would be its main method. And that comparison isn't hugely cognitive. It follows the tradition of deterministic programming. The unsupervised version would be simply to tell the program that bananas are yellow and long, that grapes are purple or green and have clusters, and the apples are red or green and round. Then the system goes out, looks at the pictures and applies that logic. The interesting thing here is taking that analogy to the bitter lesson. Is AI more powerful if it simply analyzes reams of training data without applied logic? Or is it more powerful if it can actually distinguish between various kinds of outcomes based on requested logical processes? Which came first: the chicken or the egg? The theory of the bitter lesson seems to be that the system can actually do better through supervised learning. But that supervision doesn't necessarily have to be human oversight. The machine gets a practically infinite set of training data, and makes all of its own conclusions. That's contrasted to an approach where people tell the machine what to do, and it learns based on those suggestions. Back in the era of supervised versus unsupervised learning, the unsupervised learning seemed more powerful. It seemed more resource-intensive. But AI might finally show us up just by doing things in a more efficient way – if I can use one more analogy, it's the traditional idea of the Laplace demon, an invention of the physicist Pierre-Simon Laplace who suggested that if you know enough data points, you can predict the future. In other words, brute force programming is king. We learned a lot of this in the big data age, before we learned to use LLMs, and now we're seeing the big data age on steroids. In Conclusion I also found a very interesting take at the end of Mollick's essay where he talks about businesses going down one or the other avenue of progress. Sure enough, he suggested that these companies are playing chess with each other – that one of these chess teams consists of companies using AI to be logical, and that another chess team consists of businesses using it for brute force programming and classification. If all of this is a little hard to follow, it's because we're pretty securely in the realm of AI philosophy here. It makes you think about not just whether AI is going to win out over human workers, but how it's going to do it. I forgot to mention the exponential graph that Mollick includes showing that we're closer to AGI then most people would imagine. Let's look back at the end of this year and see how this plays out.
Yahoo
22 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Apple reportedly has a 'stripped-down' AI chatbot to compete with ChatGPT in the works
Apple has fallen far behind in the competitive market of AI-powered chatbots, but it may have a plan for an in-house option that aligns with the company's "not first, but best" philosophy. According to Bloomberg's Mark Gurman, Apple created a team called "Answers, Knowledge and Information" earlier this year that's tasked with developing a "stripped-down rival to ChatGPT." Forming this team represents a major change in direction from Apple's earlier stance on artificial intelligence when the company partnered with OpenAI in 2024 to infuse Siri with ChatGPT instead of developing its own AI chatbot. Now, Gurman reported that this new Apple team will instead develop in-house AI services for a "new ChatGPT-like search experience" that can crawl the web to respond to questions. These new capabilities could be a standalone app, as well as support AI capabilities for Apple's Siri, Spotlight and Safari, according to Gurman's sources. The team is reportedly led by Robby Walker, who previously oversaw Siri, and has been advertising job openings that mention wanting experience with search algorithms and engine development. Beyond the Answers, Knowledge and Information team, Apple has experienced some growing pains when it comes to artificial intelligence. Earlier this year, the company said it would delay the release of the new-and-improved Siri, adding only that it would roll out "in the coming year." However, Apple is aware of the need to accelerate its Apple Intelligence program to stay competitive. In the latest third-quarter earnings call, the company's CEO Tim Cook said that Apple is open to acquisitions to fast-track its AI roadmap.
Miami Herald
30 minutes ago
- Miami Herald
Apple CEO drops bombshell about its future
Apple is notoriously tight-to-the-vest when it comes to making announcements, preferring to keep loyal fans and die-hard investors in the dark until the timing is right. The company's 'one more thing' mentality, reflected by founder Steve Jobs's surprising product reveals at Apple keynote conferences, appears shared by current CEO Tim Cook. In contrast to other big tech leaders, including Elon Musk, Cook often lets Apple's products do the talking. As a result, investors often look closely at Cook's comments during conference calls, looking for clues to what he may have planned for the company next. During Apple's second-quarter earnings conference call, Cook may have dropped his guard a little when he offered an interesting response about Apple's massive cash stockpile and artificial intelligence ambitions. Apple reported a solid June quarter that outpaced analysts' expectations. Revenue was a whopping $94 billion, up 10% year over year, and almost $5 billion better than Wall Street expected. Net income was over $23 billion, resulting in earnings per share, or EPS, of $1.57, up 12% from one year ago, and 14 cents ahead of estimates. Related: Veteran analyst spots unexpected star in Apple's earnings report The company's massive profit lifted its cash hoard to about $36 billion from roughly $30 billion last year, giving it plenty of financial firepower to invest in its products and software. And that's precisely what investors want to see happen. While competitors like Google have gone all in on artificial intelligence, developing the AI chatbot Gemini, Apple's AI strategy has been criticized as too little, too late. The company's arguably slow development of AI solutions relative to peers has left many investors wondering if Tim Cook's number-crunching mindset sets Apple on a course of missing out on the most significant opportunity since the dawn of the Internet. However, during Apple's earnings conference call, Cook acknowledged that he'd consider accelerating Apple's AI efforts by using its massive cash war chest. When Citi analyst Atif Malik asked about the prospects of "big M&A," Cook responded bluntly. "We've acquired around seven companies this year," said Cook on the call. "We're very open to M&A that accelerates our road map… We are not stuck on a certain size company." Cook said he didn't have anything to announce currently, but his willingness to consider a big deal could mean that reports of interest in Perplexity, a major AI player, may have merit. Cook aims to accelerate Apple's development timeline, ostensibly via internal research and development and smaller bolt-on deals. However, if he really wanted to, he could do a deal to acquire Perplexity that could, as he put it, "help us accelerate a road map." Related: Apple looks to ditch Goldman Sachs for big bank rival Perplexity provides an AI chatbot similar to Google and OpenAI's ChatGPT, but there are key differences. It has its own in-house model, Sonar, that's built on Meta Platforms' Llama open source code. It's also leaned on rival chatbots, including DeepSeek's R1. Subscribers to its Pro tier can also toggle between other large language models, including OpenAI, Gemini, Anthropic's Claude, and Elon Musk's Grok. Acquiring Perplexity would instantly give Apple an established model for monetizing AI. Perplexity operates on a freemium model, with a no-cost introductory subscription and paid service. Perplexity prioritizes real-time insight with direct responses-a design that arguably matches Apple's deep focus on user experience. In short, Perplexity's desire for a better chatbot user experience aligns nicely with Apple's approach, historically. Cook says Apple has acquired seven companies this year, about one "every several weeks." Those deals, however, are small and haven't cost the company much of its war chest. Buying Perplexity would be a different story. Perplexity, which launched in 2022 around the same time as ChatGPT, has over 22 million monthly active users. Its annualized revenue could hit $150 million this summer, according to About Chromebooks data, up from an ARR of $63 million exiting last year. The company's rapid user growth translated into Perplexity answering 780 million queries in May, according to which was up from 230 million in August 2024. Also in May, its website recorded 153 million visits, about triple the number from March. Perplexity isn't publicly traded, is currently reportedly valued at $18 billion, and its AI search market share is about 6%. Related: Apple announces major store closing and new opening The Arena Media Brands, LLC THESTREET is a registered trademark of TheStreet, Inc.
