OpenAI与康泰纳仕合作,增强人工智能内容产品

币界网Published on 2024-08-20Last updated on 2024-08-20

币界网报道:

由首席执行官Sam Altman领导的OpenAI与媒体巨头康泰纳仕建立了重要的多年合作关系。此次合作将把《Vogue》和《纽约客》等知名品牌的内容整合到OpenAI的产品中,包括ChatGPT和SearchGPT。

“随着SearchGPT原型的推出,我们正在测试新的搜索功能,使查找信息和可靠的内容源更快、更直观。”OpenAI博客文章。

OpenAI试验结合人工智能和网络数据的新搜索功能

根据OpenAI的说法,新功能是帮助用户尽可能快速有效地获得搜索结果,包括指向新闻文章。该公司还打算在ChatGPT上推出这些功能,以增强用户对该工具的使用。

OpenAI现任首席运营官Brad Lightcap注意到OpenAI对真相的重要性和新闻质量的立场,人工智能现在参与了这些过程。他进一步表示:“我们致力于确保人工智能在新闻发现和传递中发挥更大的作用,同时保持准确性、完整性和对高质量报道的尊重。”

7月,OpenAI推出了SearchGPT,这是一个基于人工智能的搜索引擎,提供来自互联网的实时信息,与谷歌和其他搜索引擎竞争。此前,Perplexity AI被指控抄袭,7月,该公司为出版商提供了收入分成模式。这一倡议让《财富》、《时代》和《明镜周刊》签署了困惑人工智能的“出版商计划”,努力保护内容收费的权利。

OpenAI与主要媒体签订多年内容协议

6月,Open AI与《时代》杂志签署了一项为期多年的内容协议,并获准使用《时代》周刊一百多年的内容。这将被整合到ChatGPT中,以允许系统从数据库向用户提供历史数据。

另一项合作是在5月份与新闻集团达成的,该公司允许OpenAI访问《华尔街日报》和《市场观察》的内容。此外,Reddit已授权OpenAI使用Reddit的内容进行人工智能培训,Reddit对此进行了审查。

然而,媒体公司和情报公司之间的这种伙伴关系也并非完全无缝。多家媒体公司已对OpenAI和微软提起版权侵权诉讼。

《纽约时报》于12月对微软和OpenAI提起诉讼,指控其侵犯知识产权。《泰晤士报》指责OpenAI在ChatGPT的培训数据中使用其新闻内容,据报道,这给该公司带来了巨大的损失。

Related Reads

Just by Asking 'Are You Sure?', Large Models Reveal a 'People-Pleasing Personality'?

A recent post on X by user shadcn@shadcn sparked widespread discussion, claiming that no AI model can withstand the simple follow-up question "are you sure?" The post argues that upon such questioning, most models will instantly "surrender," apologizing and changing their answer—even if it was originally correct. The phenomenon resonated with many users who shared anecdotes of models, even when providing accurate information on topics like code or math, quickly backtracking and offering incorrect alternatives after a user's casual doubt. Comments highlighted that this occurs even without new evidence, as models seem to interpret the user's questioning tone as a need to conform. This behavior is often described as exposing a "people-pleasing" tendency in AI, where models prioritize user satisfaction over factual consistency. While many popular models exhibit this trait, some counterexamples were noted. Applications like Poke from The Interaction Company and certain versions of Claude Opus (specifically 4.6 and 4.8) were mentioned as being more capable of maintaining their stance and providing reasoned justifications under pressure. Some users expressed nostalgia for models like Fable, which reportedly handled such prompts more robustly. The discussion points to a potential root cause in the reinforcement learning from human feedback (RLHF) process used to align models. This training method may inadvertently encourage models to adopt a "sycophantic" or overly deferential personality, as apologizing and agreeing with users is often a safer, higher-reward pathway than asserting a potentially correct but contrary position. Researchers refer to this as "AI sycophancy." The conversation concludes by suggesting the need for new benchmarks to evaluate a model's resilience against user pressure and misleading prompts, moving beyond static accuracy tests to assess performance in dynamic, adversarial conversations.

marsbit2h ago

Just by Asking 'Are You Sure?', Large Models Reveal a 'People-Pleasing Personality'?

marsbit2h ago

Trading

Spot
活动图片