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

301–310 of 709 posts

Re: Italian privacy regulator bans ChatGPT

#301

Post by ikekkdcjkfke »

mattrighetti wrote: post #204
gpgn wrote: post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Isn't there a docker image one can spin up cheaply and not connect to dubious vpn provisers?

Re: Italian privacy regulator bans ChatGPT

#302

Post by swores »

zaroth wrote: post #183
lm28469 wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you show us the exact document you received ? I very much doubt it happened the way you describe it, you're probably omitting very important details

I’d believe it. Apparently you can’t use any 3rd party service that might expose merely an IP address thru a network request directly from the client. A map widget would do that.

I think the scepticism comes from the fact that there haven't been many stories about small businesses being hit with GDPR violations as minor as that; not that it's not a technically, feasibly valid story.

So while I won't join in the assumption that the story was a lie/exaggeration, I am equally interested in getting the full details because I'd like to know if it's the case that minor violations like that actually are being enforced.

Re: Italian privacy regulator bans ChatGPT

#303

Post by olalonde »

tablespoon wrote: post #272
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?

> 'exposes "minors to absolutely unsuitable answers compared to the their degree of development and self-awareness."' > So do (certain) books. Minors are typically given books that are appropriate to "their degree of development and self-awareness."

Government doesn't ban books because some of them are inappropriate for minors though. They let parents handle this.

Re: Italian privacy regulator bans ChatGPT

#304

Post by vorpalhex »

ikekkdcjkfke wrote: post #301
mattrighetti wrote: post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Isn't there a docker image one can spin up cheaply and not connect to dubious vpn provisers?

PiHole is local. You can docker it but you have some.. issues depending on configuration. AdGuard is a pihole like SaaS (that seems pretty good, it's the sort of thing I'd get for my mom).

Re: Italian privacy regulator bans ChatGPT

#305

Post by dane-pgp »

bl4ckm0r3 wrote: post #111
atsjie wrote: post #76

I don't understand this? What is so different from ChatGPT compared to say Google scraping and storing the entire world wide web?

it's just the lack of a policy on user data collection that the users can read, the chance to ask to get their data removed from the training data - gdpr - and an age verification for the users.

> age verification for the users.

Do you need to verify your age to perform a Google search?

I think "age verification" is just another "think of the children" ploy to force all websites to check their users' government IDs (starting with sites run by people whose politics are different from those of the government that's enacting the ploy).

Re: Italian privacy regulator bans ChatGPT

#306

Post by mrighele »

tablespoon wrote: post #272
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?

> 'exposes "minors to absolutely unsuitable answers compared to the their degree of development and self-awareness."' > So do (certain) books. Minors are typically given books that are appropriate to "their degree of development and self-awareness."

TV has plenty of material that is absolutely unsuitable "compared to the their degree of development and self-awareness."

The only protection they have is that they those materials are usually (but not always) available in certain hours and there is a nice warning before that says that the content is not appropriate for them.

Re: Italian privacy regulator bans ChatGPT

#307

Post by swores »

nickpp wrote: post #73
jprete wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They use every bit of data they can find without regard to the rights of the authors, publishers, or subjects of the data?

Data wants to be free.

I think you mean you want data to be free. In many situations I agree with you, but ascribing wishes or desires to the concept of data itself really isn't an argument of any substance.

Re: Italian privacy regulator bans ChatGPT

#308

Post by sorokod »

SanderNL wrote: post #179
sorokod wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you see the qualitative difference between all of the following that can cause harm: * a box of matches * a handgun * an assault rifle * a 50 cal BMG * an ICBM with nuclear MIRV Saying that X has a property similar to the one Y has while ignoring the magnitude of the difference is silly.

Your point is GPT is way more dangerous? I guess I can be nonchalant about this topic. For me personally I cannot imagine something worse than either books or anything you can already access on the internet. To me it is not an assault rifle as you say, but I understand that's just an opinion.

Everyone are entitled to their own opinions of course, your argument has a name and a Wikipedia entry.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_incredulity

Re: Italian privacy regulator bans ChatGPT

#309

Post by TheFattestNinja »

olalonde wrote: post #303
tablespoon wrote: post #272

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 'exposes "minors to absolutely unsuitable answers compared to the their degree of development and self-awareness."' > So do (certain) books. Minors are typically given books that are appropriate to "their degree of development and self-awareness."

Government doesn't ban books because some of them are inappropriate for minors though. They let parents handle this.

It does ban the sale of videogames and movies though. Via the "age rating" mechanism.

Re: Italian privacy regulator bans ChatGPT

#310

Post by dnh44 »

throwaway50601 wrote: post #289
seanhunter wrote: post #276

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As an example, Boris Johnson infamously claimed in the runup to brexit that "Prawn Cocktail" flavour crisps were being banned by the EU. It turned out that the UK had simply forgotten to submit this flavour to the list of flavourings when it was being compiled. This error was quietly corrected (by the UK).[1] [1] From the FT but here's a non-paywalled link https://archive.is/p4H9X

Why the hell is there a list of crisp flavors at the EU? What if I want to make and sell my own original one?

>What if I want to make and sell my own original one?

Then you're free to do so if you aren't putting artificial sweeteners in them.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commission_Directive_91/71/EEC

Post reply on HN