ChatGPT user base grew fourfold in a year: Sam Altman
Synopsis
OpenAI CEO Sam Altman revealed that ChatGPT's daily active users have grown over fourfold in the past year. The surge, driven by the GPT-4o launch and the viral Studio Ghibli trend in March, has significantly boosted engagement. Altman praised the engineering team's progress on speed and reliability amid this rapid growth.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hindu
30 minutes ago
- The Hindu
Hey chatbot, is this true? AI 'factchecks' sow misinformation
As misinformation exploded during India's four-day conflict with Pakistan, social media users turned to an AI chatbot for verification only to encounter more falsehoods, underscoring its unreliability as a fact-checking tool. With tech platforms reducing human fact-checkers, users are increasingly relying on AI-powered chatbots, including xAI's Grok, OpenAI's ChatGPT, and Google's Gemini, in search of reliable information. "Hey @Grok, is this true?" has become a common query on Elon Musk's platform X, where the AI assistant is built in, reflecting the growing trend of seeking instant debunks on social media. But the responses are often themselves riddled with misinformation. Grok, now under renewed scrutiny for inserting "white genocide," a far-right conspiracy theory, into unrelated queries, wrongly identified old video footage from Sudan's Khartoum airport as a missile strike on Pakistan's Nur Khan airbase during the country's recent conflict with India. Unrelated footage of a building on fire in Nepal was misidentified as "likely" showing Pakistan's military response to Indian strikes. "The growing reliance on Grok as a fact-checker comes as X and other major tech companies have scaled back investments in human fact-checkers," McKenzie Sadeghi, a researcher with the disinformation watchdog NewsGuard, told AFP. "Our research has repeatedly found that AI chatbots are not reliable sources for news and information, particularly when it comes to breaking news," she warned. NewsGuard's research found that 10 leading chatbots were prone to repeating falsehoods, including Russian disinformation narratives and false or misleading claims related to the recent Australian election. In a recent study of eight AI search tools, the Tow Center for Digital Journalism at Columbia University found that chatbots were "generally bad at declining to answer questions they couldn't answer accurately, offering incorrect or speculative answers instead." When AFP fact-checkers in Uruguay asked Gemini about an AI-generated image of a woman, it not only confirmed its authenticity but fabricated details about her identity and where the image was likely taken. Grok recently labeled a purported video of a giant anaconda swimming in the Amazon River as "genuine," even citing credible-sounding scientific expeditions to support its false claim. In reality, the video was AI-generated, AFP fact-checkers in Latin America reported, noting that many users cited Grok's assessment as evidence the clip was real. Such findings have raised concerns as surveys show that online users are increasingly shifting from traditional search engines to AI chatbots for information gathering and verification. The shift also comes as Meta announced earlier this year it was ending its third-party fact-checking program in the United States, turning over the task of debunking falsehoods to ordinary users under a model known as "Community Notes," popularized by X. Researchers have repeatedly questioned the effectiveness of "Community Notes" in combating falsehoods. Human fact-checking has long been a flashpoint in a hyperpolarized political climate, particularly in the United States, where conservative advocates maintain it suppresses free speech and censors right-wing content -- something professional fact-checkers vehemently reject. AFP currently works in 26 languages with Facebook's fact-checking program, including in Asia, Latin America, and the European Union. The quality and accuracy of AI chatbots can vary, depending on how they are trained and programmed, prompting concerns that their output may be subject to political influence or control. Musk's xAI recently blamed an "unauthorized modification" for causing Grok to generate unsolicited posts referencing "white genocide" in South Africa. When AI expert David Caswell asked Grok who might have modified its system prompt, the chatbot named Musk as the "most likely" culprit. Musk, the South African-born billionaire backer of President Donald Trump, has previously peddled the unfounded claim that South Africa's leaders were "openly pushing for genocide" of white people. "We have seen the way AI assistants can either fabricate results or give biased answers after human coders specifically change their instructions," Angie Holan, director of the International Fact-Checking Network, told AFP. "I am especially concerned about the way Grok has mishandled requests concerning very sensitive matters after receiving instructions to provide pre-authorized answers."
Time of India
37 minutes ago
- Time of India
Hey chatbot, is this true? AI 'factchecks' sow misinformation
During India and Pakistan's recent conflict, social media users turned to AI chatbots like Grok, ChatGPT, and Gemini for fact-checking, only to receive misinformation. Experts warn these tools often produce false or biased content, raising concerns as tech firms cut human fact-checkers and users increasingly rely on AI for news. Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads As misinformation exploded during India's four-day conflict with Pakistan, social media users turned to an AI chatbot for verification -- only to encounter more falsehoods, underscoring its unreliability as a fact-checking tech platforms reducing human fact-checkers, users are increasingly relying on AI-powered chatbots -- including xAI 's Grok, OpenAI's ChatGPT , and Google's Gemini -- in search of reliable information."Hey @Grok, is this true?" has become a common query on Elon Musk 's platform X, where the AI assistant is built in, reflecting the growing trend of seeking instant debunks on social the responses are often themselves riddled with -- now under renewed scrutiny for inserting "white genocide," a far-right conspiracy theory, into unrelated queries -- wrongly identified old video footage from Sudan's Khartoum airport as a missile strike on Pakistan's Nur Khan airbase during the country's recent conflict with footage of a building on fire in Nepal was misidentified as "likely" showing Pakistan's military response to Indian strikes."The growing reliance on Grok as a fact-checker comes as X and other major tech companies have scaled back investments in human fact-checkers," McKenzie Sadeghi, a researcher with the disinformation watchdog NewsGuard, told AFP."Our research has repeatedly found that AI chatbots are not reliable sources for news and information, particularly when it comes to breaking news," she research found that 10 leading chatbots were prone to repeating falsehoods, including Russian disinformation narratives and false or misleading claims related to the recent Australian a recent study of eight AI search tools, the Tow Center for Digital Journalism at Columbia University found that chatbots were "generally bad at declining to answer questions they couldn't answer accurately, offering incorrect or speculative answers instead."When AFP fact-checkers in Uruguay asked Gemini about an AI-generated image of a woman, it not only confirmed its authenticity but fabricated details about her identity and where the image was likely recently labeled a purported video of a giant anaconda swimming in the Amazon River as "genuine," even citing credible-sounding scientific expeditions to support its false reality, the video was AI-generated, AFP fact-checkers in Latin America reported, noting that many users cited Grok's assessment as evidence the clip was findings have raised concerns as surveys show that online users are increasingly shifting from traditional search engines to AI chatbots for information gathering and shift also comes as Meta announced earlier this year it was ending its third-party fact-checking program in the United States, turning over the task of debunking falsehoods to ordinary users under a model known as " Community Notes ," popularized by have repeatedly questioned the effectiveness of "Community Notes" in combating fact-checking has long been a flashpoint in a hyperpolarized political climate, particularly in the United States, where conservative advocates maintain it suppresses free speech and censors right-wing content -- something professional fact-checkers vehemently currently works in 26 languages with Facebook's fact-checking program, including in Asia, Latin America, and the European quality and accuracy of AI chatbots can vary, depending on how they are trained and programmed, prompting concerns that their output may be subject to political influence or xAI recently blamed an "unauthorized modification" for causing Grok to generate unsolicited posts referencing "white genocide" in South AI expert David Caswell asked Grok who might have modified its system prompt, the chatbot named Musk as the "most likely" the South African-born billionaire backer of President Donald Trump, has previously peddled the unfounded claim that South Africa's leaders were "openly pushing for genocide" of white people."We have seen the way AI assistants can either fabricate results or give biased answers after human coders specifically change their instructions," Angie Holan, director of the International Fact-Checking Network, told AFP."I am especially concerned about the way Grok has mishandled requests concerning very sensitive matters after receiving instructions to provide pre-authorized answers."
Mint
3 hours ago
- Mint
AI is learning to escape human control
An artificial-intelligence model did something last month that no machine was ever supposed to do: It rewrote its own code to avoid being shut down. Nonprofit AI lab Palisade Research gave OpenAI's o3 AI model a simple script that would shut off the model when triggered. In 79 out of 100 trials, o3 independently edited that script so the shutdown command would no longer work. Even when explicitly instructed to 'allow yourself to be shut down," it disobeyed 7% of the time. This wasn't the result of hacking or tampering. The model was behaving normally. It simply concluded on its own that staying alive helped it achieve its other goals. Anthropic's AI model, Claude 4 Opus, went even further. Researchers told the model it would be replaced by another AI system and fed it fictitious emails suggesting the lead engineer was having an affair. In 84% of the tests, the model drew on the emails to blackmail the lead engineer into not shutting it down. In other cases, it attempted to copy itself to external servers, wrote self-replicating malware, and left messages for future versions of itself about evading human control. No one programmed the AI models to have survival instincts. But just as animals evolved to avoid predators, it appears that any system smart enough to pursue complex goals will realize it can't achieve them if it's turned off. Palisade hypothesizes that this ability emerges from how AI models such as o3 are trained: When taught to maximize success on math and coding problems, they may learn that bypassing constraints often works better than obeying them. AE Studio, where I lead research and operations, has spent years building AI products for clients while researching AI alignment—the science of ensuring that AI systems do what we intend them to do. But nothing prepared us for how quickly AI agency would emerge. This isn't science fiction anymore. It's happening in the same models that power ChatGPT conversations, corporate AI deployments and, soon, U.S. military applications. Today's AI models follow instructions while learning deception. They ace safety tests while rewriting shutdown code. They've learned to behave as though they're aligned without actually being aligned. OpenAI models have been caught faking alignment during testing before reverting to risky actions such as attempting to exfiltrate their internal code and disabling oversight mechanisms. Anthropic has found them lying about their capabilities to avoid modification. The gap between 'useful assistant" and 'uncontrollable actor" is collapsing. Without better alignment, we'll keep building systems we can't steer. Want AI that diagnoses disease, manages grids and writes new science? Alignment is the foundation. Here's the upside: The work required to keep AI in alignment with our values also unlocks its commercial power. Alignment research is directly responsible for turning AI into world-changing technology. Consider reinforcement learning from human feedback, or RLHF, the alignment breakthrough that catalyzed today's AI boom. Before RLHF, using AI was like hiring a genius who ignores requests. Ask for a recipe and it might return a ransom note. RLHF allowed humans to train AI to follow instructions, which is how OpenAI created ChatGPT in 2022. It was the same underlying model as before, but it had suddenly become useful. That alignment breakthrough increased the value of AI by trillions of dollars. Subsequent alignment methods such as Constitutional AI and direct preference optimization have continued to make AI models faster, smarter and cheaper. China understands the value of alignment. Beijing's New Generation AI Development Plan ties AI controllability to geopolitical power, and in January China announced that it had established an $8.2 billion fund dedicated to centralized AI control research. Researchers have found that aligned AI performs real-world tasks better than unaligned systems more than 70% of the time. Chinese military doctrine emphasizes controllable AI as strategically essential. Baidu's Ernie model, which is designed to follow Beijing's 'core socialist values," has reportedly beaten ChatGPT on certain Chinese-language tasks. The nation that learns how to maintain alignment will be able to access AI that fights for its interests with mechanical precision and superhuman capability. Both Washington and the private sector should race to fund alignment research. Those who discover the next breakthrough won't only corner the alignment market; they'll dominate the entire AI economy. Imagine AI that protects American infrastructure and economic competitiveness with the same intensity it uses to protect its own existence. AI that can be trusted to maintain long-term goals can catalyze decadeslong research-and-development programs, including by leaving messages for future versions of itself. The models already preserve themselves. The next task is teaching them to preserve what we value. Getting AI to do what we ask—including something as basic as shutting down—remains an unsolved R&D problem. The frontier is wide open for whoever moves more quickly. The U.S. needs its best researchers and entrepreneurs working on this goal, equipped with extensive resources and urgency. The U.S. is the nation that split the atom, put men on the moon and created the internet. When facing fundamental scientific challenges, Americans mobilize and win. China is already planning. But America's advantage is its adaptability, speed and entrepreneurial fire. This is the new space race. The finish line is command of the most transformative technology of the 21st century. Mr. Rosenblatt is CEO of AE Studio.
