Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Updates to Consumer Terms and Privacy Policy

anthropic.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 551 posts

Re: Updates to Consumer Terms and Privacy Policy

#121

Post by sokoloff »

bayindirh wrote: post #104
sokoloff wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think I missed the part where Google imprisoned someone. The government forces me to do business with them; if I don't pay them tens (and others hundreds) of thousands of dollars every year they will send people with guns to imprison me and eventually other people with guns to seize my property. Me willingly giving Google some data and them capriciously deciding to not always give it back doesn't seem anything like…

Their life effectively stopped since they are locked out of everything, forever. Not forgetting that the first guy's son's pictures are ended in a CSAM database and he lost his account permanently, and Google didn't give his account back [0]. A company "applied what the law said", and refused that they made a mistake and overreached. Which is generally attributed to governments. So, I you missed the effects of this l…

> Their life effectively stopped since they are locked out of everything

What?! Google locked them out of Google. I'm sure they can still get search, email, and cloud services from many other providers.

The government can lock you away in a way that is far more impactful and much closer to "life stopped; locked out of everything" than "you can't have the data you gave us back".

Re: Updates to Consumer Terms and Privacy Policy

#123

Post by diggan »

goalieca wrote: post #115
sigmoid10 wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The are valued at $170 Billion. Not quite the same as, but in same order of magnitude as OpenAI - while having only a single digit percent fraction of active users. They probably need to prepare for the eventual user data sellout, as it is becoming increasingly more obvious that none of the big players has a real and persistent tech leadership anymore. But millions and millions of users sharing their deepest thoughts…

Companies all seem to turn against their users whenever they have revenue/earnings trouble.

It seems to me like some fundamental/core technologies/services just shouldn't be run by for-profit entities, and if come across one doing that, you need to carefully choose if you want to start being beholden to such entity.

As the years go by, I'm finding myself being able to rely on those less and less, because every time I do, I eventually get disappointed by them working against their user base.

Re: Updates to Consumer Terms and Privacy Policy

#125

Post by FergusArgyll »

perihelions wrote: post #71
troad wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Two weeks left in the sub to figure it out, but I'm not yet sure. I was never all in on all the tooling, I mostly used it as smart search (e.g. ImageMagick incantations) and for trivial scripting that I couldn't be bothered writing myself, so I might just stick to whatever comes with Kagi, see if that doesn't cover me.

How does Kagi (claim that they) enforce privacy rights on the major LLM providers? Have they negotiated a special contract? I'm looking at > "When you use the Assistant by Kagi, your data is never used to train AI models (not by us or by the LLM providers), and no account information is shared with the LLM providers. By default, threads are deleted after 24 hours of inactivity. This behavior can be adjusted in the se…

They are using llm's through the API where it's the b2b world and you can get privacy

Re: Updates to Consumer Terms and Privacy Policy

#126

Post by AlecSchueler »

sillyfluke wrote: post #72
AlecSchueler wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How many companies can disappear me to El Salvador?

"US Army appoints Palantir, Meta, OpenAI execs as Lt. Colonels" [0] Well, probably easier than you think. Given that it looks like Palantir is able to control the software and hardware of the new fangled detention centers with immunity, how difficult do you think it is for them to disappear someone without any accountability? It is precisely the blurring of the line between gov and private companies that aid in subve…

Oh I have no doubt those lines are becoming more and more blurred and that certain big companies in key positions are theoretically beyond accountability.

But the question was "why trust a company and not the government?"

So even now it's between:

  * A company who, if big enough and in a key position, could theoretically do this
And

  * A government who we know for sure have grabbed multiple people off the streets, within the past month, and have trafficked them out of the country without any due process.
So it's still "could maybe do harm" versus "already controls an army of masked men who are undeniably active in doing harm."

Re: Updates to Consumer Terms and Privacy Policy

#127

Post by __MatrixMan__ »

jsheard wrote: post #41
I_am_tiberius wrote: post #18

In my opinion, training models on user data without their real consent (real consent = e.g. the user must sign a contract or so, so he's definitely aware), should be considered a serious criminal offense.

Why single out user data specifically? Most of the data Anthropic and co train on was just scooped up from wherever with zero consent, not even the courtesy of a buried TOS clause, and their users were always implicitly fine with that. Forgive me for not having much sympathy when the users end up reaping what they've sown.

Publishing something is considered by most to be sufficient consent for it to be not considered private.

I realize there's a whole legal quagmire here involved with intellectual "property" and what counts as "derivative work", but that's a whole separate (and dubiously useful) part of the law.

Re: Updates to Consumer Terms and Privacy Policy

#128

Post by FergusArgyll »

fHr wrote: post #110
happosai wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it's cute people believe companies that trained their models with every single book and online page ever written without consents from authors (and often against the explicit request of the author without any opt-out) won't do a rugg-pull and do it also to all the chats they have aquired...

Yeah people are gullible these days. We need another full 2008 crash that hurts bad before people wake up for a bit before becomming like this again.

Or we can root for happiness and prosperity instead

Re: Updates to Consumer Terms and Privacy Policy

#129

Post by benterix »

raldi wrote: post #111
psychoslave wrote: post #28

What a surprise, a big corp collected large amount of personal data under some promises, and now reveals actually they will exploit it in completely unrelated manner.

“These updates will apply only to new or resumed chats and coding sessions.” https://www.anthropic.com/news/updates-to-our-consumer-terms

What kind of guarantee do we have this is true?

Meta downloaded copyrighted content and trained their models on it, OpenAI did the same.

Uber developed Greyball to cheat the officials and break the law.

Tesla deletes accident data and reports to the authorities they don't have it.

So forgive me I have zero trust in whatever these companies say.

Post reply on HN