Gpt4free repo given takedown notice by OpenAI
tomshardware.com
tomshardware.com
That's some amazing hypocrisy.
GPT4All was about abusing random projects that make paid queries to OpenAI, not abusing OpenAI itself.
Take what they were doing to phind: https://github.com/xtekky/gpt4free/issues/153
This is like finding an image hosting site that uploads to S3, then writing a fake S3 client that actually uploads to the image hosting site, and calling it "Free S3 access". Amazon gets paid either way, you're not ripping them off in anyway.
Honestly this is OpenAI going above and beyond what they actually need to do, and for some reason people are using it as an excuse to take low effort swings at them.
GPT4All is an unrelated ML model based on GPT-J
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/other/posts-mislead-on-rules-...
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/nra-2023-conference-gun-ba...
If you don't like the secret services rules, I suggest you take it up with them...but feel free to keep on moving the goal posts to try and defend your original post, which was false.
BTW: how many shootings have happened at NRA conventions where attendees were welcomed to carry guns, and many did?
If you donate more to the NRA, they'll have more resources to defend the second amendment.
If this is "exploiting bugs" then by the same logic I'm hacking the government website by clicking view source.
Creating a gaudy branded library that's providing actual client implementations, then building an entire site that's built on those, is just bad taste
If you actually look at the implementation, some of the sites did everything right in terms of CSRF tokens and not exposing their OpenAI key directly. So the next step for the sites they're attacking with this is a whole mess of JS based detection, behavior detection, ie all the mess that we'd rather the internet didn't have.
If this person had just shared it anonymously and left it instead of drumming it up for personal glory, some motivated hackers would have used it. Now it's flooding websites at rates that break their ability to pay their bills.
If OpenAI intended to authenticate the API they probably should do it
OpenAI authenticates their API, and was getting paid for every query. OpenAI loses absolutely nothing from what these people were doing.
Who was losing was random customers who have APIs and products that call up OpenAI. In some cases those customers even secured their API keys, but by the very nature of their product, you put in some input, and get some output from OpenAI.
It's like if someone made a directory of apps that use Google's search API to show you results, so instead of paying for Google API access, you started slamming all of those apps with your queries. It's not cool to those apps, but Google shutting it down would be for the apps' benefit: they get paid either way.
The site has a rate limit, doesn't expose their API key, and it has a CSRF token. In terms of non-intrusive measures they could have taken, they did it all right.
So what's left on the table is intrusive stuff: HN has a lot of people constantly whining about how they're stuck in captcha hell because their hand built Lenovo running Firefox on BSD compiled on an abacus isn't recognized as a real client... but aggressive captchas are going to become even more pervasive if every GPT based product must fight off proxy attempts.
I'd like your comment if OpenAI had nothing to do with M$.
We've seen so many "If you don't want your art to train AI don't post it on the web", I think it's faire
Based on what? First commit seems to have been March 29th (https://github.com/xtekky/gpt4free/commit/fc995b874199ce985a...), with the express purpose of providing GPT-4 / GPT-3.5 access for free:
> # openai-gpt4
> Free gpt4 / gpt3.5 access through several reverse engineered api's (nat.dev, poe.com, t3nsor.com etc...)
And GPT-4 was announced by OpenAI 14th March. Also would be weird if the initial commit references things that haven't happened yet.
I'll say what I said before on earlier submissions about this very project, the naming is very obviously deliberately trying to confuse people to think they are using GPT-4 via that project, when they actually end up not using GPT-4. And judging by the authors comments here on HN, they have no intention of stop misleading people like this either. So good riddance.
Not yet, but they're definitely working towards it.
https://tsdr.uspto.gov/#caseNumber=97733259&caseType=SERIAL_...
OpenAI have made ChatGPT freely available. They have opened up use of their models to regular people and developers. They have the most powerful LLM and it's open to use by anyone.
In addition, they work in the open. They accept the criticisms and continue to work in the open.
Also, FWIW, if they did a 360º on openness, they'd be going in the same direction. I think you mean 180º.
I don't think that's fair - I'd guess many (probably most) large, fully open source projects have trademarked their name/project to stop people using it for similar projects, scamming, and confusing users. GPT may have been a step too far for OpenAI but even the FSF agree on Trademarks:
Possibly not deliberately correct, but it is IMO correct.
Trademarks etc. are unavoidable, and also used by the Wikimedia Foundation, the Python Software Foundation, the Free Software Foundation, etc.
OpenAI can basically do whatever the hell they want here. I imagine there might be more favourable terms for the big kids. But for your average Joe, OpenAI makes basically no commitment. OpenAI aren’t trapped. Not even remotely. You’re basically buying something at the local swap meet. I imagine that the terms via Azure are effectively the same in this particular regard, though I do understand them to be different in other ways.
Its been 1+ month and still no API access for me? Can't really blame it on demand anymore.
Will be overjoyed when we get a non facebook licensed LLM that is 95% of the quality to run locally.
or perhaps the parent comment is complaining about public access and has just not applied for the beta
I don’t know if parent poster has paid or not, but if he haven’t, he’s probably still waiting.
I'm 100% positive it's demand. Bing uses it, and Microsoft gets the exclusivity rights because they invested billions into OpenAI (which you didn't). Then there's all the other commercial players who are looking to build product on top of it.
This stuff is hard, and it’s incredibly easy to sit here on Hacker News talking about how things will be when we finally get to the fireworks factory. But for the time being, the reality is that there’s serious money and smarts behind the development and ongoing operation of this stuff.
I, a nobody, got access to GPT-4 pretty soon after it was released. Maybe your stated use case wasn’t compelling enough to get access to the beta?
I, after getting access to GPT-4 mind you, signed up for ChatGPT Plus or Pro or whatever it’s called. GPT-4 calls are still very heavily capped.
What’s the motive behind the conspiracy theory to which you’re alluding?
I'm also a self-proclaimed nobody and got access a day or two after applying, with some ideas I wanted to play around with.
Same for friends who applied, got access within days.
The only ones that didn't get access was the ones who didn't share what they wanted to build with the access.
Lock your door so I don't come into your home and get your stuff.
It would be nice to know what the actual legal request was.
Indeed.
Given how trademarks work, the name is a very real possibility.
OTOH, given how relatively expensive GPT-4 queries are, it may be genuinely straining hardware in the backend to the tune of far more money than he can afford, in which case I assume it's probably something but I don't want to guess what as that something might be dismissed by a judge as OpenAI's problem rather than this person's.
They are just trying to scare the person into taking it down. They figure it is easier to scare the repo owners than trying to get their customers to make changes on their end.