151–160 of 262 posts
You have to be rather naive if you don't think these companies don't simply train on your prompts with or without your consent. They literally scrape everything - legal or not - and claim its fair use to train on, including straight piracy The idea that they'll steal from everyone except you is just wishful thinking
You have to be rather naive if you don't think these companies don't simply train on your prompts with or without your consent. They literally scrape everything - legal or not - and claim its fair use to train on, including straight piracy The idea that they'll steal from everyone except you is just wishful thinking
It would be catastrohic for any of the big labs if it came out that they were training on what was sold as private. I get this cynical conspiratorial energy, it fits the internet well, but I can assure you most people with even mild business sense would be intensely opposed to this idea. Well, except maybe Zuckerburg, but they don't really do enterprise anyway.
Instead, confidentiality includes not literally copying material, not using trade secrets or inventions, and not using knowledge of business dealings for your own purposes.
So, while I fully expect that the big labs don't train on private material to the extent that they do those things in a blatant way, it would not be surprising if they pushed the boundaries. Humans push the boundaries all the time.
Up until now, machines did not have judgement, so if you set up a machine in such a way that you hadn't ensured it couldn't violate contract, you were culpable. But now that they have some kind of judgement, maybe it's enough to avoid liability to tell it to obey the contract, even if you give it incentives not to. After all, that's how it works with human employees, isn't it?
Perhaps now we have machines that understand language, someone somewhere is working on getting them to understand "a nod and a wink" as well.
Why not link to the https://admin.mistral.ai/plateforme/privacy panel directly
Earlier quoted context omitted.
My native-US-English speaker read: “disappointed that the Pro tier was opt ed -in to training on prompts by default” [and required manually opting out] “the Team tier was now also opt ed -in by default” [and required manually opting out] In context of each sentence and the larger comment, read smoothly here. Also - have seen more than one lively discussion on these phrases, since defaults can stick 95% of the time an…
It's understandable but it is technically inconsistent and dilutes the meaning of opt-in. Opt implies an active choice, so you never are opting for the default.
You have to be rather naive if you don't think these companies don't simply train on your prompts with or without your consent. They literally scrape everything - legal or not - and claim its fair use to train on, including straight piracy The idea that they'll steal from everyone except you is just wishful thinking
If you have an enterprise contract with them, the legal protections for the consumer is much higher… is what I’ve been told anyway
> the legal protections for the consumer is much higher
You know you give away the right to file class action law suits against Anthropic when you accept their Terms Of Use, right? (at least the Americans ones)
You have to be rather naive if you don't think these companies don't simply train on your prompts with or without your consent. They literally scrape everything - legal or not - and claim its fair use to train on, including straight piracy The idea that they'll steal from everyone except you is just wishful thinking
If you have an enterprise contract with them, the legal protections for the consumer is much higher… is what I’ve been told anyway
You have to be rather naive if you don't think these companies don't simply train on your prompts with or without your consent. They literally scrape everything - legal or not - and claim its fair use to train on, including straight piracy The idea that they'll steal from everyone except you is just wishful thinking
It would be catastrohic for any of the big labs if it came out that they were training on what was sold as private. I get this cynical conspiratorial energy, it fits the internet well, but I can assure you most people with even mild business sense would be intensely opposed to this idea. Well, except maybe Zuckerburg, but they don't really do enterprise anyway.
1. Child porn
2. Stolen music
3. Private github repos, before that was 'stopped'
4. Illegally pirated books
Them training on company prompts against the terms of service would be one of the least bad things that these companies have trained AI models on
Why do you think a company - willing to break the law for child porn - won't break the law when it comes to your personal data?
You have to be rather naive if you don't think these companies don't simply train on your prompts with or without your consent. They literally scrape everything - legal or not - and claim its fair use to train on, including straight piracy The idea that they'll steal from everyone except you is just wishful thinking
It would be catastrohic for any of the big labs if it came out that they were training on what was sold as private. I get this cynical conspiratorial energy, it fits the internet well, but I can assure you most people with even mild business sense would be intensely opposed to this idea. Well, except maybe Zuckerburg, but they don't really do enterprise anyway.
(And they totally won't do it again they swear, the contract says so)
You have to be rather naive if you don't think these companies don't simply train on your prompts with or without your consent. They literally scrape everything - legal or not - and claim its fair use to train on, including straight piracy The idea that they'll steal from everyone except you is just wishful thinking
If you have an enterprise contract with them, the legal protections for the consumer is much higher… is what I’ve been told anyway
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It would be catastrohic for any of the big labs if it came out that they were training on what was sold as private. I get this cynical conspiratorial energy, it fits the internet well, but I can assure you most people with even mild business sense would be intensely opposed to this idea. Well, except maybe Zuckerburg, but they don't really do enterprise anyway.
exactly, I don't understand how HN doesn't understand this by this logic every business contract in tech is just a bunch of lies and means nothing and the only way to do anything is to have a server sitting next to you, otherwise it's "someone else's computer"