I’m not going to comment on what was done by the China-linked accounts. I believe in fair play, so I disapprove of doing to others what you would not want them to do to you. I would argue that the China-linked accounts are at fault.
However, from a policy perspective, the actions of OpenAI in monitoring conversations people have with ChatGPT raise privacy concerns that require a consistent response. It is hypocritical to criticize the Chinese government for surveilling its citizens while your company is surveilling the conversations of its global users.
I’m neither for nor against surveillance; what I want is consistency on the issue of privacy. Double standards are the mother of all injustice. Similar to a kitchen knife, surveillance is a tool that can be used for good—such as catching criminals—or for harm, such as silencing legitimate dissent.
The problem is that who is considered a “good guy” and who is considered a “bad guy” is often determined by which side you are on. This makes the issue of privacy and surveillance highly subjective. As a society, we need to establish consistent rules on what constitutes acceptable surveillance and what constitutes unacceptable surveillance—or decide whether all surveillance is unacceptable. No double standards.
OpenAI Article:
https://openai.com/index/prc-linked-influence-operations-ai-debates/
Techmeme Permalink:
https://www.techmeme.com/260610/p55#a260610p55