Live data from Hacker News

Updates to Consumer Terms and Privacy Policy

anthropic.com

341–350 of 551 posts

Re: Updates to Consumer Terms and Privacy Policy

#341

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?

This data is useful for reinforcement learning. All the others do it. And most importantly, you can just opt-out.

Ok, to be clear, let’s say I’m dumb and accidentally go with the default (I get the color of the opt out button wrong or something). As if there’s a “publish my private emails to the internet” default-on button in email. Then, I use it to edit a rec letter for student X, with my signature Y. (Yes I know this is dumb and I try changing names when editing but am sure some actual names may slip through.) A few months later the next model is released trained on the data. Student X asks Claude what Y would write in a rec letter about X. Such a button is a “wings stay on / wings fall off” button on a plane.

Re: Updates to Consumer Terms and Privacy Policy

#342
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.

> opt-in by default Nitpicking: “opt in by default” doesn’t exist, it’s either “opt in”, or “opt out”; this is “opt out”. By definition an “opt out” setting is selected by default.

[deleted]

Re: Updates to Consumer Terms and Privacy Policy

#343

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This data is useful for reinforcement learning. All the others do it. And most importantly, you can just opt-out.

You can't opt out of the data retention policy.

The data retention period is 30 days if you don't choose to improve model training. https://www.anthropic.com/news/updates-to-our-consumer-terms...

Re: Updates to Consumer Terms and Privacy Policy

#344

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?

[deleted]

Re: Updates to Consumer Terms and Privacy Policy

#345

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?

Google mines the bejeezus out of your email, and uses it to any number of ends, including manipulating you into buying things, and also passing your correspondence on to the US government. While this is not the same as outright making your emails universally searchable - training Claude on your emails is also not the same as posting their contents.

And - this behavior of Google's has not been penalized, I'm afraid.

Re: Updates to Consumer Terms and Privacy Policy

#346

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?

This data is useful for reinforcement learning. All the others do it. And most importantly, you can just opt-out.

Just because all the others do it doesn’t make it right. Many users chose Anthropic exactly because they were not like the others.

Re: Updates to Consumer Terms and Privacy Policy

#347
post #67

Not a surprise. All the major players have reached the limits of training on existing data—they’re already training on essentially the whole internet plus a bunch of content they allegedly stole (hence various lawsuits). There haven’t been any major breakthroughs in model architecture from the major players recently and thus they’re now in a battle for more data to train on. They need data, and they want YOUR data, n…

It's not alleged that they stole the content. They told the courts they pirated the materials.

Re: Updates to Consumer Terms and Privacy Policy

#348

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> opt-in by default Nitpicking: “opt in by default” doesn’t exist, it’s either “opt in”, or “opt out”; this is “opt out”. By definition an “opt out” setting is selected by default.

This is not nitpicking, this is a sane reaction to someone modifying the meaning of words on the fly.

The original meaning of sane is "physically healthy". Its usual modern meaning is "mentally healthy". You're using it to mean "reasonable".

At which exact point is language prohibited from evolving, and why it super coincidentally the exact years you learnt it?

Re: Updates to Consumer Terms and Privacy Policy

#349
post #337

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...

And in 2010 they made https the default. Different times :)

Re: Updates to Consumer Terms and Privacy Policy

#350
Excellent. What were they waiting for up to now?? I thought they already trained on my data. I assume they train, even hope that they train, even when they say they don't. People that want to be data privacy maximalists - fine, don't use their data. But there are people out there (myself) that are on the opposite end of the spectrum, and we are mostly ignored by the companies. Companies just assume people only ever want to deny them their data.

It annoys me greatly, that I have no tick box on Google to tell them "go and adapt models I use on my Gmail, Photos, Maps etc." I don't want Google to ever be mistaken where I live - I have told them 100 times already.

This idea that "no one wants to share their data" is just assumed, and permeates everything. Like soft-ball interviews that a popular science communicator did with DeepMind folks working in medicine: every question was prefixed by litany of caveats that were all about 1) assumed aversion of people to sharing their data 2) horrors and disasters that are to befall us should we share the data. I have not suffered any horrors. I'm not aware of any major disasters. I'm aware of major advances in medicine in my lifetime. Ultimately the process does involve controlled data collection and experimentation. Looks a good deal to me tbh. I go out of my way to tick all the NHS boxes too, to "use my data as you see fit". It's an uphill struggle. The defaults are always "deny everything". Tick boxes never go away, there is no master checkbox "use any and all of my data and never ask me again" to tick.

Post reply on HN