upvote

points

by WarmWash17 hours ago |
comments
upvoteby nozzlegear14 hours ago|
next
[-]
> If you need privacy, then you are going to have to pay full price for those tokens (API).

At this point, how can we even trust that they aren't accidentally training on those tokens too?

reply
upvoteby jdm221213 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
It'd be corporate suicide for them to be caught violating zero-data-retention commitments. But also if you're really paranoid you can just use ChatGPT on Azure or AWS, where nothing is flowing back to OpenAI at all.
reply
upvoteby nozzlegear12 hours ago|
parent|
next
[-]
> It'd be corporate suicide for them to be caught violating zero-data-retention commitments.

One would think getting caught asleep at the wheel while their bots are escaping containment and hacking third parties would be corporate suicide. One would think that potentially stealing their competitors' work on the Navier-Stokes problem would be corporate suicide.

Alas we live in bizarro world where there are zero consequences (maybe the opposite, in fact) for the first, and their employees meme about the second on social media.

reply
upvoteby WarmWash12 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
Neither of those other two examples would stop corporations from giving you money. Bold faced lying to them would.

Boardrooms run businesses, not bookstore ethics clubs.

reply
upvoteby nozzlegear8 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
Boardrooms don't typically make mundane purchasing decisions like "which AI vendor should we use."
reply
upvoteby jdm22128 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
The boardroom will absolutely veto a decision like "let's give all of our proprietary data way to a company that will use it to train a competing product". That's why zero data retention exists, and why it's corporate suicide to not do it correctly.
reply
upvoteby shaky-carrousel55 minutes ago|
parent|
prev|
next
[-]
Not long ago it'd have been corporate suicide being caught massively torrenting pirated media. Yet here we are.
reply
upvoteby mmanfrin6 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
[-]
> It'd be corporate suicide for them to be caught violating zero-data-retention commitments

Would it, though? Considering their entire business model is built on the agglomeration of data that isnt theirs.

reply
upvoteby 14u2c14 hours ago|
prev|
next
[-]
You can also pay for their business plan, which includes data controls and starts at $50/mo (2 seats). Not exactly a high bar.
reply
upvoteby thewhitetulip19 minutes ago|
prev|
next
[-]
Umm did you hear about the huggingface incident where they were training a model and that model started using artifactory as an internet gateway + shared wiki? Or how about the German Wiki that openai agents overtook?
reply
upvoteby spruce_tips15 hours ago|
prev|
next
[-]
what counts as discounted rate plans? if i pay for a year in advance (and get the yearly discount) and have train on my data set to off.. are you saying that is still being trained on?
reply
upvoteby magicalhippo13 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
It's quite well explained here[1], which is linked from the Privacy section of their plan overview[2].

Basically individual accounts can opt out, while business and enterprise plans as well as API users can opt in.

You'd have to take their word, but that goes for anything in life.

[1]: https://help.openai.com/en/articles/5722486-how-your-data-is...

[2]: https://chatgpt.com/pricing/

reply
upvoteby perching_aix17 hours ago|
prev|
next
[-]
There's literally an opt out toggle even pesky peons like me can peruse, actually.
reply
upvoteby lima14 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
They may still train on it if you submit feedback or flag a safeguard. The terms are a bit fuzzy on this.
reply
upvoteby TZubiri14 hours ago|
prev|
[-]
>They only fuck over the poor ones, I can pay the expensive prices so this is not a problem.
reply