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

If you have a Claude account, they're going to train on your data moving forward

old.reddit.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 235 posts

Re: If you have a Claude account, they're going to train on your data moving forward

#171

Post by fcarraldo »

simonw wrote: post #133
lbrito wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>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?

I don't think that logically makes sense. 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.

OpenAI, Meta and X all train from user submitted data, in Meta and X’s case data that had been submitted long before the advent of LLMs.

It’s not a leap to assume Anthropic does the same.

Re: If you have a Claude account, they're going to train on your data moving forward

#172

Post by fcarraldo »

simonw wrote: post #134
hshdhdhj4444 wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Why can't companies 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?

Because they can’t be?

https://www.reuters.com/sustainability/boards-policy-regulat...

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cx2jmledvr3o

Re: If you have a Claude account, they're going to train on your data moving forward

#173

Post by distances »

andreagrandi wrote: post #142

You can opt out. It’s written quit quite clearly

I don't think that retention part was clear at all. It was separate from the opt-out. I assume I'm now opted out but that they'll keep the data for five years anyway.

Re: If you have a Claude account, they're going to train on your data moving forward

#175

Post by sjapkee »

Aurornis wrote: post #78
AlecSchueler wrote: post #5

Am I the only one that assumed everything was already being used for training?

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.

Bro really thinks privacy settings work

Re: If you have a Claude account, they're going to train on your data moving forward

#176

Post by fcarraldo »

simonw wrote: post #134
hshdhdhj4444 wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Why can't companies 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?

Also currently being discussed[0], on this very site, is both speculation that Meta is surreptitiously scanning your camera roll and a comment claiming that they worked on an earlier implementation to do just that.

It’s shocking to me that anyone who works in our industry would trust any company to do as they claim.

[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45062910

Re: If you have a Claude account, they're going to train on your data moving forward

#177

Post by Scribbd »

I know this is probably not related, but this is right after the release of the AI safety index that praised Anthropic for not using user data… And here I was considering them because they did so much better on that test.

https://futureoflife.org/ai-safety-index-summer-2025/

Re: If you have a Claude account, they're going to train on your data moving forward

#178

Post by marssaxman »

godelski wrote: post #152
marssaxman wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I did say "free to do whatever they like on their own hardware ", because intellectual property laws generally govern the transfer of such property rather than the use. After seeing the harm done by the expansion of patent law to cover software algorithms, and the relentless abuse done under the DMCA, I am reflexively skeptical of any effort to expand intellectual property concepts.

> on their own hardware That doesn't make it technically legal. That only makes it not worth pursuing. You can sue Joe Schmoe for a million dollars but if he doesn't have that then you're not getting a dime. But if Joe Schmoe is using that thing to make money, well then... yeah you bet your ass that's a different situation and the "worth" of pursuing is directly proportional to how much he is making. Doesn't matter i…

In terms of copyright law, it matters very much whether Joe Schmoe is using his own copy of the data for his own purposes, or whether he is making more copies and distributing them to other people.

If the AI companies were letting people download copies of their training data, copyright law would certainly have something to say about that. But no: once they download the training data, they keep it, and they don't share it.

Re: If you have a Claude account, they're going to train on your data moving forward

#179

Post by godelski »

marssaxman wrote: post #178
godelski wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> on their own hardware That doesn't make it technically legal. That only makes it not worth pursuing. You can sue Joe Schmoe for a million dollars but if he doesn't have that then you're not getting a dime. But if Joe Schmoe is using that thing to make money, well then... yeah you bet your ass that's a different situation and the "worth" of pursuing is directly proportional to how much he is making. Doesn't matter i…

In terms of copyright law, it matters very much whether Joe Schmoe is using his own copy of the data for his own purposes, or whether he is making more copies and distributing them to other people. If the AI companies were letting people download copies of their training data, copyright law would certainly have something to say about that. But no: once they download the training data, they keep it, and they don't sha…

  > using his own copy of the data
Yes? That is a different thing? I guess we can keep moving the topic until we're talking about the same topic if you want. But honestly, I don't want to have that kind of conversation.
Post reply on HN