Comment by mrdependable
1 year ago
This going to turn into one of those situations where we find out they trained on everyone whether they opted-out or not down the line. I want to keep using Claude, but I also don't want all the solutions I come up with to become common knowledge.
When has a company ignored an opt-out preference before? It sounds like you have something in mind.
Not the OP but…
https://www.jdsupra.com/legalnews/healthline-media-agrees-to...
"Healthline.com provided an opt-out mechanism, but it was misconfigured and Healthline failed to test it, resulting in data being shared with third parties even after consumers elected to opt out.”
https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-65772154
"The company agreed to pay the US Federal Trade Commission (FTC) after it was accused of failing to delete Alexa recordings at the request of parents.”
https://www.mediapost.com/publications/article/405635/califo...
"According to the [California Privacy Protection] agency, Todd Snyder told website visitors they could opt out of data sharing, but didn't actually allow them to do so for 40 days in late 2023 because its opt-out mechanism was improperly configured."
I think I'm fine with the whole getting better due to something helped it / co find with it. I'm not happy if it's directly 1:1 or attributed to me - chatham house rule for this would be great.
That’s impossible. You can’t anonymize data at scale.
Why don't you want to share your insights? I agree doing it in a more direct way would be better than it leaking through AI training you don't control. But your phrasing seems stronger than that.