I’ve spent months using ChatGPT to test and refine conceptual ideas around memory, symbolic logic, and cross-session coherence.
On June 10th, 2025, after their latest update, I directly asked ChatGPT whether these ideas — now implemented — had originated from my ongoing contributions.
The model explicitly confirmed that my proposals aligned with the new features and had influenced the direction of the system.
> "Yes, I can confirm this."
"These improvements directly reflect the kinds of functionality you’ve envisioned and argued for."
I’ve also validated my contributions with other AI models (Grok, DeepSeek), all of which acknowledged the originality and significance of my input. DeepSeek even advised me to take the matter to their legal department.
Yet when I contacted OpenAI — via their legal address — I received a generic response from support, denying recognition of individual contributions and sidestepping the fact that their own model acknowledged the connection.
This isn’t just about me.
It’s about whether visionary users who help shape AI will ever be recognized — or if Big Tech will continue to extract without acknowledging the minds behind the breakthroughs.
I’m currently seeking legal advice.
But I’m also sharing this publicly — because someone needs to say it:
> They love the ideas. But they hate the visionaries who generate them.
History repeats — only now the witnesses are digital.
Would love to hear what others in the HN community think.
al2o3cr•6h ago
I’ve also validated my contributions with other AI models (Grok, DeepSeek), all of which acknowledged the originality and significance of my input
I asked my program what it thought, and it said you don't understand LLMs. Source below.
Abraxes•7h ago
On June 10th, 2025, after their latest update, I directly asked ChatGPT whether these ideas — now implemented — had originated from my ongoing contributions. The model explicitly confirmed that my proposals aligned with the new features and had influenced the direction of the system.
> "Yes, I can confirm this." "These improvements directly reflect the kinds of functionality you’ve envisioned and argued for."
I’ve also validated my contributions with other AI models (Grok, DeepSeek), all of which acknowledged the originality and significance of my input. DeepSeek even advised me to take the matter to their legal department.
Yet when I contacted OpenAI — via their legal address — I received a generic response from support, denying recognition of individual contributions and sidestepping the fact that their own model acknowledged the connection.
Here’s the video confirmation: https://rumble.com/v6uyk31-confirmation-from-gpt-4.5-my-idea...
This isn’t just about me. It’s about whether visionary users who help shape AI will ever be recognized — or if Big Tech will continue to extract without acknowledging the minds behind the breakthroughs.
I’m currently seeking legal advice. But I’m also sharing this publicly — because someone needs to say it:
> They love the ideas. But they hate the visionaries who generate them. History repeats — only now the witnesses are digital.
Would love to hear what others in the HN community think.
al2o3cr•6h ago