Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Italian privacy regulator bans ChatGPT

politico.eu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 709 posts

Re: Italian privacy regulator bans ChatGPT

#201

Post by hgsgm »

modernpink wrote: post #129
oriettaxx wrote: post #2

[Google Translation] Artificial Intelligence: The Guarantor blocks ChatGPT Illegal collection of personal data. Absence of systems for verifying the age of minors Stop ChatGPT until it respects the privacy regulation. The Guarantor for the protection of personal data has ordered, with immediate effect, the temporary limitation of the processing of data of Italian users against OpenAI, the US company that developed an…

Ironically the GPT4 translation is better >Both translations effectively convey the main points and ideas of the original Italian text. However, the translation I provided seems to be more fluent and coherent, using more natural English phrasing and terminology. For example, "the Guarantor for the protection of personal data" is translated as "the Italian Data Protection Authority," which is more common and clearer i…

> Ironically the GPT4 translation is better

Not irony, demonstrating the point that GPT lies.

Re: Italian privacy regulator bans ChatGPT

#202

Post by cft »

nih0 wrote: post #148
dagorenouf wrote: post #130

Europe on top of innovation once again. Watch out US and China! /s (I say this as a French citizen)

I get you, feels like our politicians dont understand anything but sometimes I enjoy living somewhere where companies cant just do anything.

I'm an American that have been living in Europe for 15 months. My perspective is that Europe is ruled by old aristocracy that is happy with the way the life is. They're very afraid of any change, especially of giving people something constructive to do on a large scale. Another reason might be that Europe went through the two World wars, and therefore they're generally scared of any change.

Re: Italian privacy regulator bans ChatGPT

#203

Post by wrycoder »

quadcore wrote: post #30

[chatgpt translation] Stop ChatGPT until it complies with privacy regulations. The Guarantor for the protection of personal data has imposed, with immediate effect, the temporary limitation of data processing of Italian users by OpenAI, the US company that developed and manages the platform. The Authority has simultaneously opened an investigation. ChatGPT, the most famous among relational artificial intelligence sof…

If that translation is verbatim ChatGPT, it’s amazingly good.

Re: Italian privacy regulator bans ChatGPT

#204

Post by mattrighetti »

gpgn wrote: post #189
prenoob wrote: post #82

Writing from rome, italy. These bureaucrats only pretend to work. The number of privacy violations in italy is staggering, i have to take 10 calls a day from power companies because they have access to all the phone number of anybody who has a gas or energy contract. I had to change phone numbers. Meanwhile they are going against a service that as far as i know does not even require your name to serve you.

What pisses me off is that some legitimate websites like project goutenberg are all blocked by my Internet provider in Italy and I have to go through a VPN to access them. Same for scribd, vdoc, libgen and so on.

Do yourself a favour and install AdGuardHome/PiHole in your LAN so that you don't have to connect to a VPN each time, that way DNS is going to work and return a valid response back to every single device that you own in the network.

Re: Italian privacy regulator bans ChatGPT

#205

Post by th18row »

jacquesm wrote: post #180
Zurrrrr wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> That's called moving the goalposts. No, it isn't. That's the test. > no matter what you are still required to have a legal presence in the EU if you want to serve EU customers. That's nonsense. There is nothing stopping EU citizens from buying something via my US based website while they are in the EU, and I have no obligation to have any kind of presence in the EU.

> That's nonsense. There is nothing stopping EU citizens from buying something via my US based website while they are in the EU, and I have no obligation to have any kind of presence in the EU. Ignorance of the law is not an excuse for breaking the law. https://ico.org.uk/for-organisations/dp-at-the-end-of-the-tr... https://gdpr-info.eu/art-27-gdpr/ You seem to be arguing from how you believe it should work or how yo…

He's right though, the EU can do nothing in that case. Quite literally nothing. There is no law to abide because you don't "care" about it and there are no consequences.

Practicality > useless laws

Re: Italian privacy regulator bans ChatGPT

#206

Post by zecg »

th17row wrote: post #175
KeplerBoy wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's new, foreign and confusing. That's all it takes to be offending for conservatives.

[flagged]

I think this is the first time I've ever seen the greentext angle bracket and "globohomo" on hacker news in the wild, 4chan is definitely everywhere.

Re: Italian privacy regulator bans ChatGPT

#207

Post by jacquesm »

th18row wrote: post #199
jacquesm wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'll wait to see how it holds up when the EU tries to enforce it against a US website with no presence of any kind in the EU. That's called moving the goalposts. But even in that case: the EU has a lot of power and no matter what you are still required to have a legal presence in the EU if you want to serve EU customers. Breaking the law is generally not the best course of action for any company that wants to stay…

[flagged]

> In the grand scheme of things, the EU is irrelevant.

The disconnect on display in this thread is something else.

Re: Italian privacy regulator bans ChatGPT

#208

Post by Zurrrrr »

jacquesm wrote: post #196
PrimeMcFly wrote: post #194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

> At this point you seem to be being wilfully ignorant. Ok, we're done here.

I meant no insult, but I see no other explanation.

You're ignoring the letter of the law, ignoring context and nuance, making unfounded claims and providing links that don't support your points at all.

Re: Italian privacy regulator bans ChatGPT

#209

Post by SanderNL »

riffraff wrote: post #198
SanderNL wrote: post #125

'exposes "minors to absolutely unsuitable answers compared to the their degree of development and self-awareness."' So do (certain) books. That's another issue right? If you let your minor access stuff, they.. access stuff. Hard to control? I know and it is. How is this specific to OpenAI?

> How is this specific to OpenAI? it's not, that's why there are consent thingies on websites (e.g. when you could not sign up for instagram as a minor). I don't know what strange thing the regulator found in chatgpt, but it's pretty standard.

It would be really sad to shut down one of the most influential pieces of tech in modern history because they didn't implement the "consent dialog" just right.

Re: Italian privacy regulator bans ChatGPT

#210

Post by PrimeMcFly »

jacquesm wrote: post #180
Zurrrrr wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> That's called moving the goalposts. No, it isn't. That's the test. > no matter what you are still required to have a legal presence in the EU if you want to serve EU customers. That's nonsense. There is nothing stopping EU citizens from buying something via my US based website while they are in the EU, and I have no obligation to have any kind of presence in the EU.

> That's nonsense. There is nothing stopping EU citizens from buying something via my US based website while they are in the EU, and I have no obligation to have any kind of presence in the EU. Ignorance of the law is not an excuse for breaking the law. https://ico.org.uk/for-organisations/dp-at-the-end-of-the-tr... https://gdpr-info.eu/art-27-gdpr/ You seem to be arguing from how you believe it should work or how yo…

> Ignorance of the law is not an excuse for breaking the law.

You seem maybe out of our depth in this discussion. I'm not sure why you take me pointing out that truth of the matter that the GDPR is unprecedented in its extraterritoriality as an attack, but it's not. This mistake is clouding all of your replies and input into this discussion.

I'm fully aware of the law. That's what has been being discussed up until this point. The whole point of the law is that it isn't enforceable.

> You seem to be arguing from how you believe it should work or how you think it works without knowing how it actually works, which is quite important when you are operating a business.

No, I'm arguing that the GDPR is unprecedented, and EU has tried to claim jurisdiction in areas that they simply can't enforce.

If you believe otherwise, that's fine, but almost all of the legal community disagrees with you.

Post reply on HN