OpenAI is a company that makes smart AI systems, like chatbots that can talk to you. They wanted to make their AI even smarter, so they used a lot of videos from YouTube to teach it new things. This was possible because they made a special tool called Whisper that could understand what people were saying in the videos and turn them into words that the AI could learn from. Some people at OpenAI thought this might not be okay, but they decided to do it anyway. The boss of YouTube didn't know if OpenAI used their videos or not, but he said they should ask permission before using them. Read from source...

1. The report is based on unnamed sources and allegations, not verified facts or evidence. The New York Times has a history of sensationalism and clickbait journalism, which may compromise the credibility of the story.
2. OpenAI's Whisper system is not a workaround, but a legitimate technique to improve speech recognition and natural language processing for AI models. It does not violate any rules or ethics, as long as the transcribed texts are anonymized and not linked to specific users or videos.
3. The idea that training AI with YouTube videos is fair use depends on several factors, such as copyright, privacy, consent, and public interest. OpenAI may have violated some of these aspects, but the article does not provide enough details or analysis to support this claim. It also ignores the potential benefits and opportunities for innovation that arise from using diverse and rich data sources for AI research and development.
4. The interview with OpenAI's CTO Mira Murati is confusing and contradictory. She seems unsure, evasive, and defensive about the source of the training data, which raises questions about her honesty, transparency, and accountability. However, she also acknowledges that publicly available data can be used for AI research, which implies that OpenAI may have followed some ethical guidelines or best practices in its data collection and usage.
5. The article does not mention any consequences or actions taken by YouTube, Google, or other stakeholders in response to the allegations. It also does not explore the possible implications or impacts of using AI models trained on YouTube videos for various applications and domains, such as education, entertainment, journalism, activism, etc.

Negative

Reasoning: The article reveals that OpenAI may have trained AI models on YouTube video transcriptions without proper consent or knowledge of the source. This can lead to potential legal and ethical issues for both parties involved, which can harm their reputation and trustworthiness in the industry. Additionally, the report suggests that OpenAI's president Greg Brockman was directly involved in collecting videos, which raises questions about his role and responsibility in this matter. Furthermore, the article quotes OpenAI's CTO Mira Murati as being uncertain and not confident about the data used to train their products, which implies a lack of transparency and accountability within the organization. Overall, these factors contribute to a negative sentiment for the article.