131–140 of 235 posts
To 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
No you don't. You don't have to assume people are going to be bad! We should not normalize it either.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> any switch from opt-out-by-default to opt-in-by-default sucks It’s the reverse. This was opt-in and is now opt-out. Opt means choose so when “the default is opt-in” it means the option is “no” by default and you have the option to make it “yes”.
> they're now opt-out rather than opt-in to your data being used for training This is what the comment I was replying to said. I took that to mean "you have to opt out (ie you're opted in by default)".
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't understand this mindset. Why would you assume anything? It took me a couple minutes at most to check when I first started using Claude. I check when I start using any new service. The cynical assumption that everything's being shared leads to shrugging it off and making no attempt to look for settings. It only takes a moment to go into settings -> privacy and look.
>Why would you assume anything? Because they already used data without permission on a much larger scale, so it's a perfectly logical assumption that they would continue doing so with their users?
Training on everything you can publicly scrape from the internet is a very different thing from training on data that your users submit directly to your service.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't understand this mindset. Why would you assume anything? It took me a couple minutes at most to check when I first started using Claude. I check when I start using any new service. The cynical assumption that everything's being shared leads to shrugging it off and making no attempt to look for settings. It only takes a moment to go into settings -> privacy and look.
Huh, they’re not assuming anything is “being shared”. They’re assuming that Anthropic that is already receiving and storing your data, is also training their models on that data. How are you supposed to disprove that as a user? Also, the whole point is that companies cannot be trusted to follow the settings.
If they add those settings why would you expect they wouldn't respect them? Do you think they're purely cosmetic features that don't actually do anything?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"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.
Okay, but "stealing" is also an oversimplification, to the point of absurdity. 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…
Title is misleading, they're now opt-out rather than opt-in to your data being used for training. All you have to do is flip a single switch in the options to turn it off, I don't understand why everyone is treating this as being such a big deal. Edit: I just logged in to opt out, they presented me with the switch directly. It was two clicks.
No thats BS, lots of people wont know the default got flipped
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"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.
Okay, but "stealing" is also an oversimplification, to the point of absurdity. 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…
Quid pro quo. Those sites also received traffic from the audiences searching using Google. "Without compensation" really only became a thing when Google started adding the inlined cards which distilled the site's content thus obviating the need for a user to visit the aforementioned site.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"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.
Okay, but "stealing" is also an oversimplification, to the point of absurdity. 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…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
what are you doing with the data? What is your legacy going to be other than the data that you leave to be mined? Do you just not want something else to benefit from something that has no benefit to you? If so, why?
There is a myriad of reasons i may not want my data to be used. Maybe I am working on proprietary systems, maybe I am using Claude as a psychotherapist, maybe I use it as a tax advisor, the list goes on. Is it unrealistic to think that data may be extrapolated and connected to me in the future?