mucha

It appears than you can only opt-out from having OpenAI train models on your data. There isn't an option for opting to exclude your de-identified data from being used to improve OpenAI products.

"If they opted out of training, then we definitely did not train on them."

Per OpenAI's privacy policy, they use de-identified data to improve their products. From Mark Chen's comment, improving products includes improving ChatGPT and Codex in a holistic way. Improving models in a holistic way sounds a lot like training to me.

That's not what your Chief Research Officer, Mark Chen, says on X: "Do we use user feedback and de-identified data to improve ChatGPT and Codex in a holistic way? Yes. And so does every LLM company."

https://x.com/markchen90/status/2097400166554993041

Does opting out matter?

"Do we use user feedback and de-identified data to improve ChatGPT and Codex in a holistic way? Yes. And so does every LLM company." - Mark Chen, Chief Research Officer, OpenAI.

https://x.com/markchen90/status/2097400166554993041

It looks like clicking "don't train" might not matter. Per Mark Chen, the Chief Research Officer at OpenAI, "Do we use user feedback and de-identified data to improve ChatGPT and Codex in a holistic way? Yes. And so does every LLM company."

https://x.com/markchen90/status/2097400166554993041

Yes, and I can visualize in dreams too.

Yay, I'm one of "these people" now. Aphants can still have inner monologues, and most do. I do.

For folks that are thinking this is just semantics or qualia, the site mentions this:

"We can also see activation in the visual cortex during fMRI studies, the area in the brain that processes images from the eyes, further suggesting actual visualization."

(edited to add) Also, Aphants lack pupil response when asked to imagine dark/bright scenes: https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2022/04/220420092150.h...

Aphantasia and hyperphantasia can be measured. See section 6 here: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11437436/

I'd recommend that you gather your thoughts and publish a response to this paper : https://arxiv.org/abs/2301.10226

The watermark will be encoded in the visible text.

Absolutely! You can avoid the watermarks by writing or rewriting everything yourself.

Adam added a comment to that thread with the 75% number and more context.

LLMs are non-deterministic for everyone. Give it time.

That's actually an ad for X Premium+. No embarrassing ads!

What Satya says: “I’d say maybe 20%, 30% of the code that is inside of our repos today and some of our projects are probably all written by software,”

First line from the article: In April, Microsoft’s CEO said that artificial intelligence now wrote close to a third of the company’s code.

Software != AI

Source: https://www.cnbc.com/2025/04/29/satya-nadella-says-as-much-a...

CNBC misquotes Satya in the same article with his actual quote.

Interesting. How do existing systems catch Task Requirement hallucinations?

It looks like a lot of it was coming from the saveafoxsnark subreddit.

https://x.com/reddit_lies/status/1937527595236561090

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GuKLR2IaYAAMziS?format=jpg&name=...

Aphantasia solved hallucinations for me.

What happens when the LLM responsible for checking decides to ignore your explicit conditions?

That's happening. Unmodified LLM outputs aren't copyrightable.

Free beer tomorrow.

Cool. What goods/services does your business provide to customers?

Capability != Reliability