171–180 of 441 posts
Please correct me if I am wrong, but couldn't OpenAi just encrypt every conversation before saving them? With each query to the model the full conversation is fed into the model again, so I guess there is no technical need to store them unencrypted. Unless, of course, OpenAi wants to analyze the chats. The way I see it, the problem is that OpenAI employees can look at the chats and the fact that some NYT lawyer can l…
Please correct me if I am wrong, but couldn't OpenAi just encrypt every conversation before saving them? With each query to the model the full conversation is fed into the model again, so I guess there is no technical need to store them unencrypted. Unless, of course, OpenAi wants to analyze the chats. The way I see it, the problem is that OpenAI employees can look at the chats and the fact that some NYT lawyer can l…
I am pretty sure this isn't true. They have to have some sort of K-V cache system to make continuing conversations cheaper.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No it's not. It's literally a court order mandating them to collect this data. - [1] https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2025/08/openai-offers-20...
This article says nothing of the sort. The court order is to preserve existing logs they already have, not to disable logging, and hand all the logs over the plaintiffs. OpenAI's objections are mainly that 1/there are too many logs (so they're proposing a sample instead) and that 2/there's identifying data in the logs and so they are being "forced" to anonymize the logs at their expense (even though it's what they wa…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is there a technical limitation that prevents chat histories from being stored locally on the user's computer instead of being stored on someone else's computer(s) Why do chat histories need to be accessible by OpenAI, its service partners and anyone with the authority to request them from OpenAI If users want this design, as suggested by HN commenters, if users want their chat histories to be accessible to OpenAI, i…
Presumably for cross-device interactivity. If I interact with ChatGPT on my phone, then open it on my desktop. I might be a bit frustrated that I can't get to the chat I was having on my phone previously. OpenAI could store the chat conversation in an encrypted format that only you, the user, can decrypt, with the client-side determining the amount of previous messages to include for additional context, but there's p…
I absolutely want OpenAI to keep all of my chats and I absolutely don't want them to share them ( voluntarily or by force) with any private agent.
I have exactly the same expectation of any document or communication platform. It's been long established as accepted compomise between security and convenience.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> In copyright cases, typically you need to show some kind of harm. NYT is suing for statutory copyright infringement. That means you only need to demonstrate that the copyright infringement, since the infringement alone is considered harm; the actual harm only matters if you're suing for actual damages. This case really comes down to the very unsolved question of whether or not AI training and regurgitation is copyr…
NYT doesn't care about regurgitation. When it was doable, it was spotty enough that no one would rely on it. But now the "trick" doesn't even work anymore (you would paste the start of an article and chatgpt would continue it). What they want is to kill training, and more over, prevent the loss of being the middle-man between events and users.
OpenAI is free to do own reporting. NY Times is nowhere near trying to prevent others for competing as middleman.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Exactly. And the OpenAI corporates speak acting like they give a shit about our best interests. Give me a break, Sam Altman. How stupid do you think everyone is? They have proven that they are the most untrustworthy company on the planet And this isn't AI fear speaking. This is me raging at Sam Altman for spreading so much fear, uncertainty, and doubt just to get investments. The rest of us have to suffer for the las…
To me, no company has the customers’ best interests in mind. This whole thing is akin to when Apple was refusing to unlock phones for the FBI. Of course, Apple profits by having people think that they take privacy seriously, and they demonstrate it by protecting users’ privacy. Same thing here; OpenAI needs chats to have some expectation of privacy, especially because a large use case of AI is personal advice on thin…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This article says nothing of the sort. The court order is to preserve existing logs they already have, not to disable logging, and hand all the logs over the plaintiffs. OpenAI's objections are mainly that 1/there are too many logs (so they're proposing a sample instead) and that 2/there's identifying data in the logs and so they are being "forced" to anonymize the logs at their expense (even though it's what they wa…
[flagged]
If OpenAI hadn't used data from the NYT without permission in the first place this wouldn't have happened. That is the root cause of all this. I'm glad the NYT is fighting them. They've infringed the rights of almost every news outlet but someone has to bring this case.
Private? Aren’t they stored in a third party server, subject to OpenAI terms of service and all sorts of relevant laws?