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

71–80 of 551 posts

Re: Updates to Consumer Terms and Privacy Policy

#71

Post by perihelions »

troad wrote: post #52
perihelions wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What are you replacing it with?

Two weeks left in the sub to figure it out, but I'm not yet sure. I was never all in on all the tooling, I mostly used it as smart search (e.g. ImageMagick incantations) and for trivial scripting that I couldn't be bothered writing myself, so I might just stick to whatever comes with Kagi, see if that doesn't cover me.

How does Kagi (claim that they) enforce privacy rights on the major LLM providers? Have they negotiated a special contract?

I'm looking at

> "When you use the Assistant by Kagi, your data is never used to train AI models (not by us or by the LLM providers), and no account information is shared with the LLM providers. By default, threads are deleted after 24 hours of inactivity. This behavior can be adjusted in the settings."

https://help.kagi.com/kagi/ai/assistant.html#privacy

And trying to reconcile those claims with the instant thread. Anthropic is listed as one of their back-end providers. Is that data retained for five years on Anthropic's end, or 24 hours? Is that data used for training Anthropic models, or has Anthropic agreed in writing not to, for Kagi clients?

Re: Updates to Consumer Terms and Privacy Policy

#72

Post by sillyfluke »

AlecSchueler wrote: post #24
bayindirh wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Trusting companies more than the government always feels strange. It's something I can't grasp.

How many companies can disappear me to El Salvador?

"US Army appoints Palantir, Meta, OpenAI execs as Lt. Colonels" [0]

Well, probably easier than you think. Given that it looks like Palantir is able to control the software and hardware of the new fangled detention centers with immunity, how difficult do you think it is for them to disappear someone without any accountability?

It is precisely the blurring of the line between gov and private companies that aid in subverting the rule of law in many instances.

[0] https://thegrayzone.com/2025/06/18/palantir-execs-appointed-...

Re: Updates to Consumer Terms and Privacy Policy

#75

Post by sokoloff »

bayindirh wrote: post #11
aurareturn wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I used to not care about this stuff but with the way this administration is going about things, I suddenly care very much about it.

Trusting companies more than the government always feels strange. It's something I can't grasp.

The government has the direct power to imprison me or seize my property if cross them.

It seems strange to not be able to grasp the difference in kind here.

Re: Updates to Consumer Terms and Privacy Policy

#77

Post by elashri »

JohnnyMarcone wrote: post #25
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.

I got a pop-up when I opened the app explaining the change and an option to opt out. That seems very transparent to me.

> That seems very transparent to me

Implicit consent is not transparent and should be illegal in all situations. I can't tell you that unless you opt out, You have agreed to let me rent you apartment.

You can say analogy is not straightforward comparable but the overall idea is the same. If we enter a contract for me to fix your broken windows, I cannot extend it to do anything else in the house I see fit with Implicit consent.

Re: Updates to Consumer Terms and Privacy Policy

#78

Post by op00to »

BoorishBears wrote: post #7

Someone's hallucination riddled Perplexity search should not be the source for this: https://www.anthropic.com/news/updates-to-our-consumer-terms https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45053806

The perplexity search seemed pretty solid to me. What hallucinations did you see?

Re: Updates to Consumer Terms and Privacy Policy

#79

Post by merelysounds »

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.

> 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.

Re: Updates to Consumer Terms and Privacy Policy

#80

Post by riz_ »

wzdd wrote: post #68
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.

Everywhere else in Anthropic's interface, yes/no switches show blue when enabled and black when disabled. In the box they're showing about this change the slider shows grey in both states: visit it in preferences to see the difference! It's not just disappointing but also kind of sad that someone went to the effort to do this.

This is probably because there are laws in some countries that restrict how these buttons/switches can look (think cookie banners, where sometimes there is a huge green button to accept, and a tiny greyed out text somewhere for the settings).
Post reply on HN