On the Techspot article that “Samsung warns fab employees of ChatGPT after confidential data leaks”: this reporting lacks context, so I’ll dispense…

This seems more like a PR issue at its core. From the OpenAI Helpcenter:

OpenAI does not use data submitted by customers via our API to train OpenAI models or improve OpenAI’s service offering. […] When you use our non-API consumer services ChatGPT or DALL-E, we may use the data you provide us to improve our models. You can request to opt-out

I find all of this commonly unknown, misunderstood or underappreciated.

Samsung serves as a great case study: from the original Korean article, translated to English:

the DS division authorized the use of ChatGPT

So, if the reporting is accurate, Samsung DS encouraged their workforce to:

• use a consumer-grade tool for work
• submit proprietary information to a third party
  • … like Samsung do anyways with Salesforce, AWS, …
  • … thus business as usual, kind-of

They realized undesirable outcomes, but rather than reversing the decission to admit the wrong-tool-for-job, they take to the press on how they throttled it back:

After recognizing the incidents, the company applied ‘emergency measures’ such as limiting the upload capacity to 1024 bytes per question.
(and make the tool less useful for legitimate uses, obviously)

… and rather blame their regular workforce:

The company plans to investigate the circumstances of the incidents and take disciplinary action if necessary against the employees who leaked corporate information.

(just to be clear: I am not advocating for feeding sensitive or proprietary data to the OpenAI API. To the contrary. But that’s not the point.)