• skillissuer@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    7 days ago

    Provided you have humans overseeing the summaries

    right, at which point you’re just better doing it the right way from the beginning, not to mention such tiny detail as not shoving classified information into sam altman’s black box

    • conciselyverbose@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      edit-2
      7 days ago

      I’m not really arguing the merit, just answering how I’m reading the article.

      The systems are airgapped and never exfiltrate information so that shouldn’t really be a concern.

      Humans are also a potential liability to a classified operation. If you can get the same results with 2 human analysts overseeing/supplementing the work of AI as you would with 2 human analysts overseeing/supplementing 5 junior people, it’s worth evaluating. You absolutely should never be blindly trusting an LLM for anything. They’re not intelligent. But they can be used as a tool by capable people to increase their effectiveness.

      • David Gerard@awful.systemsOPM
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        7 days ago

        the other thing about text like this is that many of the claims of what they’re doing will be completely false because someone will have misunderstood then will try to reconstruct a sensible version

      • skillissuer@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        6 days ago

        it’s not airgapped, it’s still cloud, it can’t be. it’s some kind of “secure” cloud that passed some kind of audit. openai already had a breach or a few, so i’m not entirely sure it will pan out

        • V0ldek@awful.systems
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          4 days ago

          Iirc OpenAI uses Microsoft’s cloud?

          If so, MSFT has a special airgapped cloud specifically for USGov.

          • froztbyte@awful.systems
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            3 days ago

            tbh I personally wouldn’t expect/suspect this to be using any of the flavours of govcloud for mass-market flavours (because that has implications on staff hiring etc)

            the easy way to handle this is to have a backend/frontend separation with baseline access controlled simply by construction of routing and zone primitives. it’s relatively simple (albeit moderately involved) to do this on most cloud providers

          • deborah@awful.systems
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            3 days ago

            they probably do. I worked for a content-as-a-service company that had a contract to deliver our product, airgapped, to a three-letter agency on a regular schedule, and we were a tiny company. Microsoft’s biggest customer is probably the U.S. government; I’d be shocked if they don’t provide an in-house airgapped set of full Azure services for the entire intelligence agency system.

            • V0ldek@awful.systems
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              3 days ago

              They do. Source: I worked in at MSFT in Azure Identity. It’s completely separate, has its own rollout schedule for all products, etc.

              There’s also a physically separate cloud for China 🙃

        • conciselyverbose@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          6 days ago

          My interpretation of what they’re saying is that it’s on their own servers in their own location that can only be accessed from specific access points.

          Talking about networks as airgapped isn’t abnormal.