More than 100,000 conversations between users of ChatGPT and the online AI platform remain accessible through internet searches despite attempts by ChatGPT developer OpenAI to erase them after what was described as a “short-lived experiment”, it has been reported.
Online investigative journalism unit Digital Digging said the majority of the conversations, which are preserved in their entirety, are “harmless”, but some were not.
In its report, it cites the examples of an Italian lawyer discussing how to obtain land from an indigenous community in the Amazon for a multinational seeking to build a hydroelectric facility, an Egyptian seeking to use AI to write critically about the country’s authoritarian regime and a researcher documenting their academic fraud.
The report follows an incident at the end of last month when it became apparent that thousands of ChatGPT users were essentially ticking a box that made their conversations with the platform visible to search engines like Google without users appreciating the consequences.
RM Block
The facility, which was described by a senior OpenAI executive as a “short-lived experiment”, was quickly disabled and some 50,000 conversations “scrubbed” by the company.
Experts say the Digital Digger article highlights the difficulty with erasing online posts once they have initially been made publicly available. The wider incident points to issues with AI literacy among the rapidly growing number of people engaging with the technology.
The consequences can go well beyond ridicule or embarrassment, according to Pradeep Sanyal, a San Francisco-based adviser to company boards and chief executives on AI strategies.
Influencers beware, Revenue is on the prowl
“Some posts reveal commercially sensitive information, legal strategies, political dissent in authoritarian contexts and confidential personal matters such as health conditions,” he said. “These could lead to reputational damage, competitive disadvantage, regulatory scrutiny or even personal safety risks depending on jurisdiction.
“There have been revelations that, if tied back to the individual or organisation, could have significant consequences. The example of a lawyer discussing strategy to displace indigenous communities for the lowest possible price, for instance, is not merely embarrassing; it could have legal and ethical implications,” he told The Irish Times.
Barry Scannell, an AI law and policy partner at William Fry solicitors and a member of the Government-appointed AI Advisory Council, said his “jaw hit the floor” when he saw some of the original material made accessible to routine Google searches.
On Monday he said that the enduring issues raised by the incident “have shone a light on the nature of information people are sharing with AI tools, some of it deeply commercially sensitive where they look to have it help them strategise or deal with other business issues [and] some of it deeply personal, where they are treating AI like a therapist.
“Some of this reminds me of the early days of electronic communication when some people were very flippant about what they put in emails and that was sometimes shown up in discovery processes. It is certainly another reminder of the importance of companies having very clear processes and policies when it comes to their people using this technology.”
