ZDR on OpenRouter + Aperture by Tailscale. And you should be good with the right config
Can I opt out of my input or output data being used for training?
201–210 of 262 posts
Re: Can I opt out of my input or output data being used for training?
#202You 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.
I think it's arguable that it wouldn't be catastrophic.
Doesn't have to be outright lying, it can be something like "opt out" being off by default, and them opting you in at the next update without you noticing.
This is just a gut feeling and goes into the conspiratorial energy, but I'm pretty sure I can find countless examples of companies behaving like this in the past where it wasn't catastrophic (google meta amazon adobe ...)
Re: Can I opt out of my input or output data being used for training?
#203You 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
I don’t care about what they do, I only care about what they say, that way, when compliance requires us to use LLMs that don’t train on inputs, I can point to that policy and continue on using the LLM.
If they are secretly scraping input prompts, that no longer becomes my problem. Someday, a massive lawsuit comes down, and everyone gets to play the victim.
You’re naive for thinking we don’t know how this really works.
Re: Can I opt out of my input or output data being used for training?
#204[flagged]
Re: Can I opt out of my input or output data being used for training?
#205You 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
I don’t care about what they do, I only care about what they say, that way, when compliance requires us to use LLMs that don’t train on inputs, I can point to that policy and continue on using the LLM. If they are secretly scraping input prompts, that no longer becomes my problem. Someday, a massive lawsuit comes down, and everyone gets to play the victim. You’re naive for thinking we don’t know how this really works…
What they say is not the same as what they wrote in the ToS you didn't read.
If they stole your stuff and used in to train their model, what does it help if there is a lawsuit some years later which you most likely have no benefit from?
Re: Can I opt out of my input or output data being used for training?
#206This is a hugely misleading editorialised title. The page title is "Can I opt out of my input or output data being used for training". Right at the top of the page it says "In certain cases, your input and output data (such as conversations, documents, and other user-provided content) may be included in Mistral’s model training programs. You retain full control over this processing and have the right to opt out of th…
"You can opt out at any time" .... "Of course we'll randomly turn that option off for you aka FB style and hope you don't notice. There is zero legal liability for us doing so, so why wouldn't we".
This is a European company, there absolutely is legal liability. The GDPR expressly prohibits using customer data for a purpose other than the one the customer intended and consented to.
Re: Can I opt out of my input or output data being used for training?
#207I can understand companies not wanting to leak sensitive data or information, so not wanting their inputs used for training.
But the individual level moral perspective confuses me. You object to your own input being used for training "for free", but you're ok to use models which already slurped the data of millions of other people "for free"?
I don't get it. Obviously this is going to be a controversial take on here (I am not blind to the sentiment), so, please help me understand. If you're a conscientious objector, why are you using the models in the first place?
Re: Can I opt out of my input or output data being used for training?
#208[dead]
Re: Can I opt out of my input or output data being used for training?
#209Earlier quoted context omitted.
They said "opt in to training on prompts by default," which is coherent English and perfectly fine. The phrases "opt in" and "opt out" will always be contextual based on what is being opted, so it really falls to the reader to pay attention to that context. Please don't give English language advice as though you are an authority; there is not a rule of the English language that would make their usage unacceptable.
> They said "opt in to training on prompts by default," which is coherent English and perfectly fine. No, it's really not. It should read "opted in to training on prompts by default". "Opt in" means "you have to affirmatively turn this thing on". "Opted in" means "the thing is currently enabled". Which is why it's probably better to write it as "enabled by default". Much harder to misinterpret.
[deleted]
Re: Can I opt out of my input or output data being used for training?
#210I can understand companies not wanting to leak sensitive data or information, so not wanting their inputs used for training. But the individual level moral perspective confuses me. You object to your own input being used for training "for free", but you're ok to use models which already slurped the data of millions of other people "for free"? I don't get it. Obviously this is going to be a controversial take on here…
Private users also have sensitive information which, if leaked, could be used to their detriment (e.g training data getting hacked, etc).
I don't see any distinction between companies and people when it comes to moral objections re training data - at least, if that's a thing, I'm unaware of it.
I do agree with your last point re the hypocrisy.