5 ms·

> OpenAI is committed to ensuring that the benefits of AI are broadly accessible. > We design mechanisms which avoid arbitrarily deciding who gets access for l

by glub 15d ago

> OpenAI is committed to ensuring that the benefits of AI are broadly accessible. > We design mechanisms which avoid arbitrarily deciding who gets access for legitimate use and who doesn't. That means using clear, objective criteria and methods. [1] So many nice-sounding words. Two weeks ago OpenAI arbitrarily decided that anyone holding an ID from 44 countries where it sells ChatGPT, including mine, may be targeted by its models but may not defend with the same model. And you won't find a single announcement from OpenAI about this anywhere. Pick the wrong country, get "Unable to verify", no reason, no appeal. [2] They revoked TAC from users who already had it, called it a technical issue, told everyone to re-verify, collected ID and face scans again (eight times in my case), and only a week later moved the block to the country selector so it fails before you upload anything. So now I learn that I will not have access to Astra. Great. Very excited about this broad accessibility and clear, objective criteria from OpenAI. This level of transparency must be studied. [1] https://openai.com/index/scaling-trusted-access-for-cyber-defense/ https://openai.com/index/scaling-trusted-access-for-cyber-de... [2] https://lubaretsi.com/en/writing/openai-tac-country-gate/ https://lubaretsi.com/en/writing/openai-tac-country-gate/

matheusmoreira 15d ago
> That means using clear, objective criteria and methods. For the record, I sent them an LGPD (brazilian GDPR) request for information on all of those supposedly objective criteria and methods they used to reject me from TAC. As a brazilian data subject, it is my right to know that, and to request a review if the decision was made via automated means. Sol itself guided me through this process. They provided me with neither the information nor the requested review. Sol advised me to escalate to regulatory action.
- glub 15d ago
  I've exhausted all possible avenues to get any response from OpenAI on this. Emailed them, published research that took me 2 nights to get together (saw media pick it up too), I've asked every relevant OpenAI person on X to say something, anything, saw others from Moldova also do the same. Crickets. They appear to simply not care at all.
  - nradov 15d ago
    Is there any reason why OpenAI should care? If they don't want your business then someone in your country can build a competing model.
    - cubefox 15d ago
      They realistically can't. It's almost impossible to catch up to OpenAI. Only Anthropic might do it, but this is also an US American company.
      - nradov 15d ago
        It's not unrealistic. Several Chinese companies seem to be close behind. People thought they would never catch up to the US car industry and now look what happened.
        gmueckl 15d ago
        Frankly, the US car industry hasn't set the bar very high. They were not very innovative in the last couple of decades. I think the European industry is a better benchmark, and even then the result is pretty clear.
        cubefox 15d ago
        To the best of our knowledge, these Chinese companies rely on distillation of frontier models by OpenAI and Anthropic, which isn't a method available at the frontier itself.
        disgruntledphd2 15d ago
        I'm not really convinced that there's much secret sauce here, all the methods and data are public, the only real difference is how much compute it takes.
        Amekedl 15d ago
outside1234 15d ago
[flagged]
- glub 15d ago
  I'd rather sound desperate than be someone who noticed a shadow criterion quietly widening the already wide gap in access to frontier intelligence, and did nothing about it. Don't worry about me, I'm fortunate enough that this won't affect me. I'd suggest asking yourself why someone raising it on behalf of a whole country read to you as "pick me."
spongebobstoes 14d ago
your own post says in detail that the US has export restrictions on those countries. this doesn't seem like an arbitrary ruling by OpenAI it sounds like they are complying with US law
- jtrn 14d ago
  Op probably knows. But thanks for articulating it clearly.
deleted 14d ago
[deleted]
vikramkr 14d ago
I'm so confused by the point you're trying to make. There's a lot of rhetoric about Georgia and an investigation about how the country list is 1:1 with some mysterious list from 1996 - but like - it's an export control list? Yeah, Washington approved the sale of missiles to Georgia. That's how that list works. Washington has to approve it. Openai is not Washington. They're perfectly reasonably erring on the side of caution and potentially over-complying with export controls. And if they then have to get approval from the feds to export to Georgia - well - our current administration has provided many reasons to over comply with trade related controls and not exactly been a champion of encouraging cross country trade right now. Idk what you expect from OpenAI or why you think it would matter at all that Georgia is a democracy or an ally of the US or is closely aligned with us. Ask Canada and NATO how much that's counted for with this administration.

by glub 15d ago

matheusmoreira 15d ago

> That means using clear, objective criteria and methods. For the record, I sent them an LGPD (brazilian GDPR) request for information on all of those supposedly objective criteria and methods they used to reject me from TAC. As a brazilian data subject, it is my right to know that, and to request a review if the decision was made via automated means. Sol itself guided me through this process. They provided me with neither the information nor the requested review. Sol advised me to escalate to regulatory action.

glub 15d ago
I've exhausted all possible avenues to get any response from OpenAI on this. Emailed them, published research that took me 2 nights to get together (saw media pick it up too), I've asked every relevant OpenAI person on X to say something, anything, saw others from Moldova also do the same. Crickets. They appear to simply not care at all.
- nradov 15d ago
  Is there any reason why OpenAI should care? If they don't want your business then someone in your country can build a competing model.
  - cubefox 15d ago
    They realistically can't. It's almost impossible to catch up to OpenAI. Only Anthropic might do it, but this is also an US American company.
    - nradov 15d ago
      It's not unrealistic. Several Chinese companies seem to be close behind. People thought they would never catch up to the US car industry and now look what happened.
      - gmueckl 15d ago
        Frankly, the US car industry hasn't set the bar very high. They were not very innovative in the last couple of decades. I think the European industry is a better benchmark, and even then the result is pretty clear.
      - cubefox 15d ago
        To the best of our knowledge, these Chinese companies rely on distillation of frontier models by OpenAI and Anthropic, which isn't a method available at the frontier itself.
        disgruntledphd2 15d ago
        I'm not really convinced that there's much secret sauce here, all the methods and data are public, the only real difference is how much compute it takes.
        Amekedl 15d ago

outside1234 15d ago

[flagged]

glub 15d ago
I'd rather sound desperate than be someone who noticed a shadow criterion quietly widening the already wide gap in access to frontier intelligence, and did nothing about it. Don't worry about me, I'm fortunate enough that this won't affect me. I'd suggest asking yourself why someone raising it on behalf of a whole country read to you as "pick me."

spongebobstoes 14d ago

your own post says in detail that the US has export restrictions on those countries. this doesn't seem like an arbitrary ruling by OpenAI it sounds like they are complying with US law

jtrn 14d ago
Op probably knows. But thanks for articulating it clearly.

deleted 14d ago

[deleted]

vikramkr 14d ago

I'm so confused by the point you're trying to make. There's a lot of rhetoric about Georgia and an investigation about how the country list is 1:1 with some mysterious list from 1996 - but like - it's an export control list? Yeah, Washington approved the sale of missiles to Georgia. That's how that list works. Washington has to approve it. Openai is not Washington. They're perfectly reasonably erring on the side of caution and potentially over-complying with export controls. And if they then have to get approval from the feds to export to Georgia - well - our current administration has provided many reasons to over comply with trade related controls and not exactly been a champion of encouraging cross country trade right now. Idk what you expect from OpenAI or why you think it would matter at all that Georgia is a democracy or an ally of the US or is closely aligned with us. Ask Canada and NATO how much that's counted for with this administration.