This problem wouldn't exist if openai wouldn't store chatlogs (which of course they want to do, so that they can train on that data to improve the models). But calling nyt the bad guy here is simply wrong because it's not strictly necessary to store that data at all, and if you do, there will always be a risk of others getting access to it.
Fighting the New York Times' invasion of user privacy
361–370 of 441 posts
Re: Fighting the New York Times' invasion of user privacy
#362Earlier quoted context omitted.
everyone like me that won't ever pay them a cent. Yeah, how terrible that you should be expected to spend /eleven minutes/ of the average U.S. tech worker's salary for a month of information. Perish the thought. They should sell their stuff by mail You're in luck! You can subscribe to the New York Times by mail, just like you want.
At this point I would pay just as much to not see a single link to NYT content in my life. I can't pay for that? Well, that's my point.
I can't pay for that?
You don't have to. You only need one line of CSS in your browser's supplemental CSS file to hide them.
If you can't do that minimal amount of coding, you're on the wrong web site.
Re: Fighting the New York Times' invasion of user privacy
#363Earlier quoted context omitted.
Nonsense. It's easy to design an app where the server stores all information in an encrypted form. If OpenAI "cared about privacy" like this PR piece claims, they would do this. They don't because they (obviously) don't care and they (obviously) want the data for their purposes.
> It's easy to design an app where the server stores all information in an encrypted form. If you read the article, you'd see this: > Our long-term roadmap includes advanced security features designed to keep your data private, including client-side encryption for your messages
"We will add privacy features in the future" is hard to reconcile with "we are fighting for privacy now"
Re: Fighting the New York Times' invasion of user privacy
#364[dead]
Re: Fighting the New York Times' invasion of user privacy
#365Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why does OpenAI collect and retain for 30 days^1 chats that the user wants to be deleted It was doing this prior to being sued by the NYT and many others OpenAI was collecting chats even when the user asked for deletion, i.e., the user did not want them saved That's why a lawsuit could require OpenAi to issue a hold order, retain these chats for longer and produce them to another party in discovery If OpenAI was not…
I'd trust Sam Altman about as far as I could throw him and there is absolutely no way OpenAI should be having sensitive private conversations with anybody. Sooner or later all that data will end up with Microsoft who can then correlate it with a ton of data they already have from other sources (windows, office online, linkedin, various communications services including 'teams', github and so on). This is an intellige…
> […] there is absolutely no way OpenAI should be having sensitive private conversations with anybody. Sooner or later all that data will end up with Microsoft who can then […]
I don't think you even need to go as far as to Microsoft (who have earned zero points in the Privacy Protection league), just have a look at Altmans "I want to create a biometric database of every human" Orb/World-coin eye-scanning project: https://www.ft.com/content/0c5c2b8d-b185-40b6-9221-b80ee130b...
Re: Fighting the New York Times' invasion of user privacy
#366Earlier quoted context omitted.
Just because I used italics to emphasize something one time doesn’t mean you get to talk to me like that. I am not a child and you’re being unnecessarily patronizing. I let it slide in the previous comment and gave you the benefit of the doubt despite what I saw but this comment clearly illustrates how disrespectful you’re being. Have a good rest of your day man
I think you, as you put it, rudely, patronizingly, disrespectfully responded to the wrong post: mine was a polite one about a comparison between 2 tools and your statement that the comparing posters must be acting in bad faith (whereas you, with your differing opinion, are acting in good faith ). I'm not interested in focusing on tone-policing, since it is one of the lowest forms of debate and usually avoids the subs…
Fine let’s not police tone and say it straight: you know the rules here, so stop being a jerk and leave me alone. I don’t want to talk to you anymore.
Re: Fighting the New York Times' invasion of user privacy
#367Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why does OpenAI collect and retain for 30 days^1 chats that the user wants to be deleted It was doing this prior to being sued by the NYT and many others OpenAI was collecting chats even when the user asked for deletion, i.e., the user did not want them saved That's why a lawsuit could require OpenAi to issue a hold order, retain these chats for longer and produce them to another party in discovery If OpenAI was not…
I'd trust Sam Altman about as far as I could throw him and there is absolutely no way OpenAI should be having sensitive private conversations with anybody. Sooner or later all that data will end up with Microsoft who can then correlate it with a ton of data they already have from other sources (windows, office online, linkedin, various communications services including 'teams', github and so on). This is an intellige…
[deleted]
Re: Fighting the New York Times' invasion of user privacy
#368Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why does OpenAI collect and retain for 30 days^1 chats that the user wants to be deleted It was doing this prior to being sued by the NYT and many others OpenAI was collecting chats even when the user asked for deletion, i.e., the user did not want them saved That's why a lawsuit could require OpenAi to issue a hold order, retain these chats for longer and produce them to another party in discovery If OpenAI was not…
I'd trust Sam Altman about as far as I could throw him and there is absolutely no way OpenAI should be having sensitive private conversations with anybody. Sooner or later all that data will end up with Microsoft who can then correlate it with a ton of data they already have from other sources (windows, office online, linkedin, various communications services including 'teams', github and so on). This is an intellige…
[deleted]
Re: Fighting the New York Times' invasion of user privacy
#369Earlier quoted context omitted.
Nonsense. It's easy to design an app where the server stores all information in an encrypted form. If OpenAI "cared about privacy" like this PR piece claims, they would do this. They don't because they (obviously) don't care and they (obviously) want the data for their purposes.
> It's easy to design an app where the server stores all information in an encrypted form. If you read the article, you'd see this: > Our long-term roadmap includes advanced security features designed to keep your data private, including client-side encryption for your messages
Look, Proton somehow baked it into the design.
Open Ai didn't want to.
Re: Fighting the New York Times' invasion of user privacy
#370Earlier quoted context omitted.
everyone like me that won't ever pay them a cent. Yeah, how terrible that you should be expected to spend /eleven minutes/ of the average U.S. tech worker's salary for a month of information. Perish the thought. They should sell their stuff by mail You're in luck! You can subscribe to the New York Times by mail, just like you want.
At this point I would pay just as much to not see a single link to NYT content in my life. I can't pay for that? Well, that's my point.
You can write a simple extension for your web browser that will solve this for you, which is more in line with the hacker ethos than paying for it.