Comment by Aurornis
1 year ago
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.
>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.
>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.
Yes. It's way easier and cheaper when the data comes to you instead of having to scrape everything elsewhere.
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.
2 replies →
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
Because they can’t be?
https://www.reuters.com/sustainability/boards-policy-regulat...
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cx2jmledvr3o
1 reply →
Have you really never heard of companies saying one thing while doing another?
1 reply →
> I check when I start using any new service.
So your assumption is that the reported privacy policy of any company is completely accurate. There there is no means for the company to violate this policy and that once violated you will immediately be notified.
> It only takes a moment to go into settings -> privacy and look.
It only takes a moment to examine history and observe why this is wholly inadequate.
> It only takes a moment to go into settings -> privacy and look.
Do you have any reason to think this does anything?
Jira ticket Nr 97437838. Training service ignores settings, trains on your data anyway. Priority: extremely low. Will probably do it in 2031 when the intern joins.
!!!!!!!!!! this... all the times HIPAA and data privacy laws get ignored directly in Jira tickets too. SMH
Because the demand for training data is insatiable and they already are using basically everything available and they need more human generated data and chats with their own LLM is a perfect source.
A silicon valley startup would never say one thing and then do another!
Bro really thinks privacy settings work