Legally, I don't understand how Anthropic's lawyers would have allowed this. Maybe I am just naively optimistic about these matters? I am a Max customer and I might leave! Talk about a "rug pull" ... and I considering moving to an inferior provider! Privacy is a fundamental human right. Please do better, we have not learned our lesson in tech or society because no one is facing any consequences.
If you have a Claude account, they're going to train on your data moving forward
91–100 of 235 posts
Re: If you have a Claude account, they're going to train on your data moving forward
#92To be honest, these companies already stole terabytes of data and don't even disclose their dataset, so you have to assume they'll steal and train at anything you throw at them
"Reading stuff freely posted on the internet" constitutes stealing now? Seems like an excessively draconian interpretation of property rights.
Re: If you have a Claude account, they're going to train on your data moving forward
#93Probably that people accused it of being sycophantic and they have tried to adjust it but they didn't do it well. It'd rather criticize and make assumptions about my behavior rather than keeping it technical. Ha!
I prefer gemini. Seems a bit stressed always assuming that I might be frustrated by its answers which is also weird to assume but it is not straight disrespectful at least.
So I am back to testing chatgpt. I keep changing.
Re: If you have a Claude account, they're going to train on your data moving forward
#94Re: If you have a Claude account, they're going to train on your data moving forward
#95Excellent. What were they waiting for up to now?? I thought they already trained on my data. I assume they train, even hope that they train, even when they say they don't. People that want to be data privacy maximalists - fine, don't use their data. But there are people out there (myself) that are on the opposite end of the spectrum, and we are mostly ignored by the companies. Companies just assume people only ever w…
> The defaults are always "deny everything".
This is definitely not true for a massive amount of things, I'm unsure how you're even arriving at this conclusion.
Re: If you have a Claude account, they're going to train on your data moving forward
#96Re: If you have a Claude account, they're going to train on your data moving forward
#97Earlier quoted context omitted.
"Reading stuff freely posted on the internet" constitutes stealing now? Seems like an excessively draconian interpretation of property rights.
"Reading stuff freely posted on the internet" is also very different from a business having machines consume large volumes of data posted on the Internet for the purpose of generating value for them without compensating the creators. I'm not making a value judgement one way or the other, but "reading stuff freely posted on the Internet" is an oversimplification.
It makes no sense to put stuff up on the internet where it can freely be downloaded by anyone at any time, by people who are then free to do whatever they like with it on their own hardware, then complain that people have downloaded that stuff and done what they liked with it on their own hardware.
"Having machines consume large volumes of data posted on the Internet for the purpose of generating value for them without compensating the creators" is equally a description of Google.
Re: If you have a Claude account, they're going to train on your data moving forward
#98Re: If you have a Claude account, they're going to train on your data moving forward
#99To be honest, these companies already stole terabytes of data and don't even disclose their dataset, so you have to assume they'll steal and train at anything you throw at them
"Reading stuff freely posted on the internet" constitutes stealing now? Seems like an excessively draconian interpretation of property rights.
Re: If you have a Claude account, they're going to train on your data moving forward
#100So, I guess they run out of data to train on ... I wonder on how much they can rely on the data and what kind of "knowledge" they can extract. I never give feedback and most time (let's say 5 out of 6) the result cc produce it simply wrong. How can they know the result is valuable or not?
Maybe they can use same method as Google does - if user clicked a link and didn't try to search again, it can assume the link had intended result. So your silence can be used as a warmish signal that you were satisfied. (...or not. Depends on your usage fingerprint.)