Even in the wide world of dubiously useful AI chatbots, Copilot really stands out for just how incompetent it is. The other day I was working on a PowerPoint presentation, and one of the slides included a photo with a kind of cluttered looking background. Now, I can probably count the number of things that AI is genuinely good at on one hand, and context aware image editing trends to be one of them, so I decided to click the Copilot button that Microsoft now has built directly into PowerPoint and see what happens. A chat window popped up and I concisely explained what I wanted it to do: “please remove the background from the photo on slide 5.” It responded on that infuriating obseqious tone that they all have and assured me that it would be happy to help with my request just as soon as I uploaded my presentation.
What?
The chatbot running inside an instance of PowerPoint with my presentation open is asking me to “upload” my presentation? I explained this to it, and it came back with some BS about being unable to access the presentation because a “token expired” before requesting again that I upload my presentation. I tried a little longer to convince it otherwise, but it just kept very politely insisting that it was unable to do what I was asking for until I uploaded my presentation.
Eventually I gave up. The photo wasn’t that bad anyway.
Who could have seen this coming?
microslop deez nuts
“Hey Copilot, what have Putin and Trump been exchanging emails about?”
For clarity, it’s only being summarized for the users that wrote it, it’s not leaking them to everyone. A comedically inept bug to allow though, holy shit.
AITA for understanding that as meaning in order to “summarize” the data the AI read it entirely and will never be instructed to “forget” that data
Why would that make you an asshole?
I’ve noticed growing opposition to critical thoughts about the sick and twisted nature of ai and the people who are in the cult.
Unless someone has released something new while I haven’t been paying attention, all the gen AIs are essentially frozen. Your use of them can’t impact the actual weights inside of the model.
If it seems like it’s remember things is because of the actual input of the LLM is larger than the input you will usually give it.
For instance lets say the max input for a particular LLM is 9096 tokens. The first part of that will be instructions from the owners of the LLM to prevent their model from being used for things they don’t like. Lets say the first 2000 tokens. That leaves 7k or so for a conversation that will be ‘remembered’.
Now if someone was really savvy, they’d have the model generate summaries of the conversation and stick them into another chunk of memory, maybe another 2000 tokens worth, that way it will seem to remember more than just the current thread. That would leave you with 5000 tokens to have a running conversation.
Your general understanding is entirely correct, but:
Microsoft is almost certainly recording these summarization requests for QA and future training runs; that’s where the leakage would happen.
That is kind of assuming the worst case scenario though. You wouldn’t assume that QA can read every email you send through their mail servers ”just because ”
This article sounds a bit like engagement bait based on the idea that any use of LLMs is inherently a privacy violation. I don’t see how pushing the text through a specific class of software is worse than storing confidential data in the mailbox though.
That is assuming that they don’t leak data for training but the article doesn’t mention that.
This is some pathetic chuddery you’re spewing…
You wouldn’t assume that QA can read every email you send through their mail servers ”just because”
I absolutely would, and Microsoft explicitly maintains the right to do that in their standard T&C, both for emails and for any data passed through their AI products.
https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/servicesagreement#14s_AIServices
v. Use of Your Content. As part of providing the AI services, Microsoft will process and store your inputs to the service as well as output from the service, for purposes of monitoring for and preventing abusive or harmful uses or outputs of the service.
100% agree. At this point I am assuming everything sent through their servers is actively being collected for LLM training.
The repercussions of pushing something that no one wants and too quickly on top of that
Wouldn’t that rather be an MS Graph bug? Why give copilot all mails and have it decide what to summarise and what not? —> I’m sure that’s not the way it’s implemented. I don’t understand the framing of the article tbh. „AI bad“ seems to click well.
