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

331–340 of 551 posts

Re: Updates to Consumer Terms and Privacy Policy

#331

Post by Deegy »

monsieurbanana wrote: post #324
Deegy wrote: post #320

I guess I'll take the other side of what most are arguing in this thread. Isn't it a great thing for to us to collectively allow LLM's to train on past conversations? LLM's probably won't get significantly better without this data. That said I do recognize the risk of only a handful of companies being responsible for something as important as the collective knowledge of civilization. Is the long term solution self cu…

You mean collectively allow us to train Claude's llm? Pretty big omission there

I believe I addressed that in my third paragraph?

It does suck that there are only a few companies with enough resources to offer these models. But it's hard to escape the power laws.

I'm hoping that costs come down to the point where these things are basically a commodity with thousands of providers.

Re: Updates to Consumer Terms and Privacy Policy

#332

Post by lkbm »

tinyhouse wrote: post #64

GO to setting and under privacy you can change the default. (they make it pretty hard to find). Also note "To help us improve our AI models and safety protections, we’re extending data retention to 5 years."

Putting a privacy setting under Settings->Privacy is making it "pretty hard to find"? Where else did you look first?

Re: Updates to Consumer Terms and Privacy Policy

#333

Post by shadowgovt »

superposeur wrote: post #308

Everyone seems to be unsurprised by this move, but I’m genuinely shocked. What a shoot your own foot business decision. Google, evil though it be, doesn’t post the text of your gmails in its search results because who would consider using Gmail after that? This is the llm equivalent. Am I missing something?

The LLM equivalent is what Google does do, which is train its spam filters on the contents of your emails coupled to the signal of what human beings flag as spam.

(It was one of the first significant value-adds of GMail: at its scale, Google could create a global-concept understanding of the content and pattern of spam across hundreds of millions of users. That was the kind of Big Data that made it possible to build filters where one could confidently say "This is tuned on all spam in the wild, because we've seen all spam in the wild").

Re: Updates to Consumer Terms and Privacy Policy

#334

Post by aleph_minus_one »

superposeur wrote: post #308

Everyone seems to be unsurprised by this move, but I’m genuinely shocked. What a shoot your own foot business decision. Google, evil though it be, doesn’t post the text of your gmails in its search results because who would consider using Gmail after that? This is the llm equivalent. Am I missing something?

> Am I missing something?

I think you do:

According to the article https://www.perplexity.ai/page/anthropic-reverses-privacy-st...

"Enterprise and educational customers will continue operating under their existing privacy protections, as the policy changes specifically exclude Claude for Work and Claude for Education services. These commercial accounts remain governed by separate contractual agreements that maintain stricter data handling standards.

Organizations using Claude through business partnerships or educational licenses can continue their operations without concern for the new training policies affecting their sensitive communications or proprietary information."

Thus, I think your claim

> What a shoot your own foot business decision.

likely does not hold: the non-commercial accounts likely led to Anthropic loosing money, so they are not liked by Anthropic anyway (but are a an "inconvenient necessity" to get people to notice and try out your product offering). With this new decision, Anthropic makes this "free-riding" less attractive.

I bet that Anthropic will soon release a press statement (that exists in the drawers for quite a long time) "We are listening to your concerns, and will thus extend our 'privacy-conscious offering' to new groups of customers. Only 30 $ per month."

Re: Updates to Consumer Terms and Privacy Policy

#336

Post by ttoinou »

aosaigh wrote: post #122

Does this include any code base you are running Claude Code with (where parts of code are sent as part of the context)? I'm not hugely clear on how my private codebase is exposed to Claude in the first place when using Claude Code.

I think this is about claude.ai , not Claude Code nor Claude models API (but I'm not 100% sure). So no, unless you copy paste your code into claude.ai

Re: Updates to Consumer Terms and Privacy Policy

#337

Post by rs186 »

superposeur wrote: post #308

Everyone seems to be unsurprised by this move, but I’m genuinely shocked. What a shoot your own foot business decision. Google, evil though it be, doesn’t post the text of your gmails in its search results because who would consider using Gmail after that? This is the llm equivalent. Am I missing something?

Gmail used to serve ads based on your emails for many years until 2017. https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/06/26/534451513...

Re: Updates to Consumer Terms and Privacy Policy

#338

Post by Deegy »

bluecalm wrote: post #328
Deegy wrote: post #303

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If your work was truly novel, wouldn't the odds of it showing up in later models be extremely low given that these are probabilistic? In a sense these machines are outputting the aggregate of the collective thoughts of the commons. In order for concepts to be output they have to be quite common in the training data. Which works out kind of nice for privacy and innovation because by the time concepts are common enough…

They might optimize learning to weight novel/unexpected parts more in the future. The better the models become (the more the expect) the more value they will get from unexpected/new ideas.

Good point. But can the models even behave that way? They depend on probability. If they put a greater weight on novel/unexpected outputs don't they just become undependable hallucination machines? Despite what some people think, these models can't reason about a concept to determine it's validity. They depend on recurring data in training to determine what might be true.

That said, it would be interesting to see a model tuned that way. It could be marketed as a 'creativity model' where the user understands there will be a lot of junk hallucination and that it's up to them to reason whether a concept has validity or not.

Re: Updates to Consumer Terms and Privacy Policy

#339

Post by weregiraffe »

episteme wrote: post #38
troad wrote: post #8

You can opt out, but the fact that it's opt-in by default and made to look like a simple T/C update prompt leaves a sour taste in my mouth. The five year retention period seems... excessive. I wonder if they've buried anything else objectionable in the new terms. It was the kick in the pants I needed to cancel my subscription.

What will you use instead? I’m finding Claude the best experience since ChatGPT 5 is so slow and not any better answers than 4.

>What will you use instead? I’m finding Claude the best experience since ChatGPT 5 is so slow and not any better answers than 4.

You could try programming with your own brain

Re: Updates to Consumer Terms and Privacy Policy

#340

Post by 34679 »

cactca wrote: post #258
34679 wrote: post #149

I'd bet this is related to their recent decision to boot people for being "abusive" to Claude. It now seems that was an attempt to keep their training data friendly.

This! Any LLM provider that monitors chat/api history for ‘abuse’ towards the model is considering using user data for training. An Effective Altruism ethos provides moral/ethical cover for trampling individual privacy and property rights. Consider their recent decision to provide services for military projects. As others have pointed out, Claude was trained using data expressly forbidden for commercial reuse. The on…

Maybe I'll use the remainder of my subscription time to help improve Void. It's already pretty good.

https://voideditor.com/

https://github.com/voideditor/void

Post reply on HN