Directing someone to commit a crime is still a crime. OpenAI most likely has criminal liability in this instance and the FBI should open an investigation if they haven't already.
Crime is not the appropriate word but there's clearly a well documented history of abusing conditions toward data labeling workers [1] [2] [3]
For those looking for an AI data labeling service also tries to help workers along the way, here's a plug to the company I started "dataprep.be" [4]
We have a small preference for working workers with special needs (deaf, mute and employees with small handicaps). Public subsidies for these type of workers help our case in the EU as well as contraints for some public institutions in the EU to hire more handicap workers.
With clients more sensitive to costs, we also work with remote data labelers from developing countries. We help putting checks in place to limit forced and child labor. We pay 5% extra so they have time to learn high demand tech skills. (Using Khan Academy and free access to a normally 250$/year Datacamp subscription)
Happy to work with the HN crowd or just receive feedback and mentoring!
(My email is in my profile)
The fact that you refer to workers in "developing countries" as being leveraged for clients "more sensitive to costs" should tip you off that what you're doing is exploitative and dehumanising.
You have it backwards; OpenAI was the one that made the request. OpenAI claimed that the Kenyan company misunderstood the request. Your parent comment is claiming that OpenAI is criminally liable for making the request.
