OpenAI Strikes Reddit Deal To Train Its AI On Your Posts (theverge.com) 43
Emilia David reports via The Verge: OpenAI has signed a deal for access to real-time content from Reddit's data API, which means it can surface discussions from the site within ChatGPT and other new products. It's an agreement similar to the one Reddit signed with Google earlier this year that was reportedly worth $60 million. The deal will also "enable Reddit to bring new AI-powered features to Redditors and mods" and use OpenAI's large language models to build applications. OpenAI has also signed up to become an advertising partner on Reddit.
No financial terms were revealed in the blog post announcing the arrangement, and neither company mentioned training data, either. That last detail is different from the deal with Google, where Reddit explicitly stated it would give Google "more efficient ways to train models." There is, however, a disclosure mentioning that OpenAI CEO Sam Altman is also a shareholder in Reddit but that "This partnership was led by OpenAI's COO and approved by its independent Board of Directors." "Reddit has become one of the internet's largest open archives of authentic, relevant, and always up-to-date human conversations about anything and everything. Including it in ChatGPT upholds our belief in a connected internet, helps people find more of what they're looking for, and helps new audiences find community on Reddit," Reddit CEO Steve Huffman says.
Reddit stock has jumped on news of the deal, rising 13% on Friday to $63.64. As Reuters notes, it's "within striking distance of the record closing price of $65.11 hit in late-March, putting the company on track to add $1.2 billion to its market capitalization."
No financial terms were revealed in the blog post announcing the arrangement, and neither company mentioned training data, either. That last detail is different from the deal with Google, where Reddit explicitly stated it would give Google "more efficient ways to train models." There is, however, a disclosure mentioning that OpenAI CEO Sam Altman is also a shareholder in Reddit but that "This partnership was led by OpenAI's COO and approved by its independent Board of Directors." "Reddit has become one of the internet's largest open archives of authentic, relevant, and always up-to-date human conversations about anything and everything. Including it in ChatGPT upholds our belief in a connected internet, helps people find more of what they're looking for, and helps new audiences find community on Reddit," Reddit CEO Steve Huffman says.
Reddit stock has jumped on news of the deal, rising 13% on Friday to $63.64. As Reuters notes, it's "within striking distance of the record closing price of $65.11 hit in late-March, putting the company on track to add $1.2 billion to its market capitalization."
Reddit? (Score:5, Funny)
That'll knock a few IQ points off it...
Re: Reddit? (Score:1)
"This is what crazy backwoods redneck MAGA people are like, they even support him after he's a convicted rapist and business fraud" got to give the AI all the data.
Re: (Score:1)
He wasn't convicted of rape but don't let facts get in the way of tribalism am I right?
First, it was a civil not criminal suit, so it's liable, not guilty. Second, he was found liable of sexual abuse -- and defamation. The rape/sexual abuse differentiation stems from NY law. Other states may have different definitions. Colloquially speaking though, he raped her.
From Did Donald Trump rape E. Jean Carroll? Here's what a jury and judge said. [usatoday.com] (and other sources):
Under New York criminal law, an assault constitutes "rape" only if it involves vaginal penetration by a penis. That was the definition the jury was instructed to use in the civil case.
But the jurors' conclusion that Trump sexually abused Carroll "necessarily implies" that they did, in fact, believe he penetrated her with his fingers, Kaplan said.
In May, Carroll was awarded a combined $5 million for sexual abuse and for a 2022 denial by Trump that the jury concluded defamed Carroll. On Friday, a jury in a separate civil defamation case awarded Carroll $83.3 million for two lengthy denials Trump made in 2019, soon after Carroll went public with her story.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:1)
First, I didn't say it was a criminal trial that's a strawman from your fever dream.
True, but you and OP used the word "convicted" which is used in criminal trials, whereas the phrase "found liable" is used in civil trials. So while you didn't say it, your words implied it, probably unintentionally or out of ignorance. I was just trying to be clear(er). That said, your "fever dreams" assertion is unwarranted. Calm down.
The fact that Donald Trump was not convicted of rape still stands. I know it pains you but that doesn't change reality.
Again, you're inserting your own bias. It doesn't pain me, I was trying to be specific. He wasn't found liable for rape in NY, but probably would have in other states a
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:1)
Another wall of text trying to argue against a simple fact. Get a grip.
You should read it as it was all actually agreeing with you, and explaining why.
You're correct, he *wasn't* "convicted of rape" but, rather, was "found liable of sexual abuse/assault." And he was very lucky that was in NY 'cause elsewhere he would have been convicted of rape or found liable, depending on if it was a criminal/civil case there. But, hey, ignore simple facts and logic and keep denying (or ignoring) that anything of substance was legally determined. You do you and have a great weekend. K
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
You're correct, he *wasn't* "convicted of rape" but, rather, was "found liable of sexual abuse/assault."
We should poll women to see if getting involuntarily fingered isn't rape.
That there are people using the fact that he is liable for sexual assault as a flex merely shows how the Republican party has gone to hell.
Remember when Slick Willy was impeached over a consensual blowjob? Oh, the horrors!
Now the selfsame people are claiming "It was only sexual assault and sexual abuse, not rape".
Protip for the supporters: sexual assault is a bad thing in itself, and trying to defend the person who did it ma
Re: (Score:2)
I agree with your points. The argument was about the technicalities and how they are misleading, using his own viewpoint as a starting point. Your commentary adds the consequences of that. People cling to the fact that he wasn't convicted of rape, even though his behavior would/is commonly construed to be just that. What he *was* convicted of was almost as bad and the verdict was limited by the letter of the law in NY. His followers seem to blindly ignore all that to give him a pass -- for some reaso
Re: (Score:2)
I agree with your points. The argument was about the technicalities and how they are misleading, using his own viewpoint as a starting point. Your commentary adds the consequences of that. People cling to the fact that he wasn't convicted of rape, even though his behavior would/is commonly construed to be just that. What he *was* convicted of was almost as bad and the verdict was limited by the letter of the law in NY. His followers seem to blindly ignore all that to give him a pass -- for some reason.
His cult members bragging about how he was "only" convicted of sexual assault reminds me of Apu from the Simpson's bragging about how his new Beef Jerky has 50 percent less rectum.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
reddit mods are abusive and unethical people using anonymity to censor the users
completely corrupt
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Yup, the term Garbage In, Garbage Out springs to mind
worse, the biased reddit mods censor any reasonable positions and promote corporate propaganda, reddit is completely corrupted and overrun by undue influences
Re: Reddit? (Score:5, Funny)
You're confusing slashdot ... (Score:2)
... with 9gag.
Reddit's death knell (Score:2)
Who's going to post knowing their comments will just used as AI fodder? Not to mention the overmoderation makes Reddit useless anyways. The problem is our AIs are going to be as censored and manipulated as we are.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
The small fraction of luddites that leave over this will be unnoticed. I agree their demise started with over moderation which is also why it's now a horrible source for training AI on. This AI is going to feed on spam and extreme regressive left ideology detached from reality.
It's not a good source of data and the evil people that own and control Reddit don't care, all they care about is how much pire they can shove down their greedy pie holes ....
Right-O (Score:5, Funny)
Time to expand my posting of AI-poisoning bafflegab to Reddit. Off I go...
Re: (Score:3)
Redit is immune (Score:1)
Time to expand my posting of AI-poisoning bafflegab to Reddit. Off I go...
The reason why Reddit is such a perfect source of AI training, is that it's largely immune from single person attacks like this.
The reason is Reddits high level of segmentation, and ease of voting.
If you go into some tiny community and post nonsense, the AI probably will not even notice your stuff because it's related to a very out of the way subject.
In any community you post nonsense in, you'll be voted down hard and AI won't train o
Confusing title (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Strikes has two conflicting meanings. You can strike a deal--which I assume is the meaning here--which means to make a deal. You can also strike an item from a list--meaning to remove it. That could also have applied here which would mean they canceled an existing deal.
It could also mean they whacked it with a 2x4. Let's teach the AI that one. :-)
Reddit? So not need to poison the data... (Score:2)
Reddit already comes with enough misinformation and random crap.
Usenet (Score:5, Interesting)
Say what you want about Usenet, it was definitely a stinking cesspool in a lot of ways, but there was also a huge amount of uncensored, useful, beneficial discussions which took place on this mostly-unmoderated platform.
Now, every discussion that takes place is in actuality unpaid authorship of content for a corporate entity that they can use, reject, and censor for their own profit and benefit.
The great promise of the Internet providing freedom and voice to legions of the unheard and powerless has been successfully co-opted by corporate America into just another revenue-generating mechanism for them to exploit, and this time the labor is not just cheap, it is free. Hell they do not even have to hire moderators, that is provided free of charge as well. And yes, people will tolerate and accept content guidelines that they are expected to comply with, and that moderators will gladly enforce.
We agree to ever growing lists of rules and limitations of our rights to secure for ourselves the privilege of giving away our own time, copyrights, and content. For free. We accept their punishments, and count the moments until they allows us to come back and resume working without compensation,
Oh look, and now they are going to sell our content to others for a profit too. I cannot wait to give them more content to sell!
Humans are capable of unbelievable ingenuity, but on the whole, at the end of the day, we are just livestock, easily manipulated and brainwashed into doing the bidding of whomever can build a big enough bandwagon to hold them.
We were always like this, but the Internet has really magnified it and made it obvious in ways that, in years prior, was difficult to practically illustrate.
Re: (Score:2)
I periodically visit usenet via google groups to see what's happening in my old favourites.
It's a stinking cesspool of spam and phishing. So sad, I used to enjoy contributing to the discourse, and watching the occasional flame war from the sidelines.
Re: (Score:2)
I periodically visit usenet via google groups to see what's happening in my old favourites.
It's a stinking cesspool of spam and phishing. So sad, I used to enjoy contributing to the discourse, and watching the occasional flame war from the sidelines.
Did you hear, Google is ending Usenet coverage? Apparently they'll keep the old stuff online, but I'll bet it gets 86ed before too long. Yes, it was pretty good at one time. I remember the antenna groups on Usenet. At one time, I could have good conversations and tech exchanges with actual experts in the field. There was some noise of course, and a few kooks - but even the kooks knew to keep it to a level that others would respond to them.
Then the weirdos came to Usenet. Strange fights erupted, made wei
Re: (Score:1)
I disagree - the internet has wonderfully lived up to its promise of providing complete freedom!
Including the complete freedom to: follow users, personally identify users, sell users' personal information to the highest bidder, sell users' browsing history to others, harass those that one disagrees with, spread authoritarian propaganda, amongst other freedoms! But most importantly it has provided unfettered freedom to consolidate monopolistic power; and the complete freedom to remove freedom from others!
Re: (Score:3)
Say what you want about Usenet, it was definitely a stinking cesspool in a lot of ways,
You should have seen it before 1993. People put their real names and even office phone numbers on every post. It was paradise, with the minor exception of once a year with a new batch of Freshman students in the US getting access. They'd ask questions that were in the FAQ, and other transgressions, but soon learned to conform to the respectful culture. Each group had its own rules, and you could find a place for anything. "Spam" was just when somebody annoyingly cross-posted the same question to multiple
Re: (Score:2)
Say what you want about Usenet, it was definitely a stinking cesspool in a lot of ways,
You should have seen it before 1993. People put their real names and even office phone numbers on every post. It was paradise, with the minor exception of once a year with a new batch of Freshman students in the US getting access. They'd ask questions that were in the FAQ, and other transgressions, but soon learned to conform to the respectful culture. Each group had its own rules, and you could find a place for anything. "Spam" was just when somebody annoyingly cross-posted the same question to multiple groups. Usenet was Good. ... Then came AOL and the great uneducated hordes.
And it's happening to the modern internet as well. Idiots get a smartphone, and they be idiots on the web.
I hate to be a back in the day guy, but at one time, there was a sort of filter that kept stupid people off Usenet and the early internet. You had to know some things, often building your computer from parts. Configuring cards and software. We had some kooks, but they were intelligent kooks.
Now people that are not intelligent at all can walk into Verizon, come out with their android and start bein
Re: (Score:2)
garbage in, garbage out (Score:2)
Anti-AI subreddits? (Score:2)
Will OpenAI's bot avoid the subreddits (= forums) devoted to criticism and sometimes downright hatred again AI?
Unlike other subreddits, I'd think that posts intended to "poison the well" would definitely be allowed there.
r/bullshit (Score:2)
Reddit has become one of the internet's largest open archives of authentic, relevant, and always up-to-date human conversations
As well as nonsense, extreme partisanship, filter bubbles and circle-jerking.
It's probably one of the worst sources to train an AI on unless you're working towards fully automating social media so that no actual human every has to post or ready anything there.
Reddit ouroboros (Score:1)
Dumb enough to eat itself
(AI posting to itself...)
My Japanese porn recommendations used for training (Score:2)
Still don't see much value in using Reddit for training OpenAI based on my Japanese porn recommendations. =/