5 ms·

Italy lifts ban on ChatGPT after data privacy improvements

120 points by jacooper 4y ago

it_citizen 4y ago
I wonder if they were looking for a way to back out without losing face or if those changes were genuinely enough.
- arlort 4y ago
  I'd say 50-50 This change by itself fixed a pretty big issue, but at the same time they probably realised they jumped the gun, especially with regards to the issues stemming from the training method
  - habibur 4y ago
    I would have loved to see it go on at least for a year and then see what happens.
- bonzini 4y ago
  This is the full set of requests and outcomes (scroll for English): https://www.garanteprivacy.it/home/docweb/-/docweb-display/docweb/9881490 https://www.garanteprivacy.it/home/docweb/-/docweb-display/d... The only missing one is this: "introduced mechanisms to enable data subjects to obtain erasure of information that is considered inaccurate, whilst stating that it is technically impossible, as of now, to rectify inaccuracies". It is not clear to me however how one would request removal of information about themselves.
p-e-w 4y ago
Astonishing how governments just take foreign corporations by their word when they promise they won't use data for a certain purpose. For all we know (and I doubt the Italian government knows much more), they could have just added an "opt out" checkbox that does absolutely nothing.
- Veen 4y ago
  One has to assume some level of good faith, or it would be impossible to agree on anything. Plus, if OpenAI lied about this and it became known that they lied, they'd be shut down again and have much harder path back. Every privacy organization across the world would consider them an untrustworthy organization, and all good faith, friendly interaction would end.
  - matheusmoreira 4y ago
    > One has to assume some level of good faith From the tech industry which known for its surveillance capitalism? They should be imposing regular audits of the systems as a pre-condition for allowing them to even exist.
  - p-e-w 4y ago
    Technology corporations have been blatantly breaking European law for the past 15 years, and received multiple billion-dollar fines for it. Car manufacturers have committed fraud to deceive regulators into believing their products comply with emission standards. What "good faith" are you talking about?
    - avianlyric 4y ago
      Good faith that maybe they fixed it this time, and that even a multi-national company doesn’t have the stones to bold face lie to a government, when they’re under scrutiny for past deception. Without some level of good faith, there’s no path back for organisations. The only acceptable form of remediation would be dissolving the company entirely, which huge impacts on many people. Certainly past regulation has been a little toothless. But laws like GDPR with their maximum set as a percentage of global revenue show that governments are catching up. Those fines can be large enough to inflict real pain and damage to corporations that repeatedly misbehave.
      - p-e-w 4y ago
        > Those fines can be large enough to inflict real pain and damage to corporations that repeatedly misbehave. To my knowledge, such a large fine has never been imposed in 5 years, despite rampant noncompliance across the entire industry, including Big Tech, with countless complaints having been filed but gone nowhere.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
nmlax 4y ago
Nadella has been pushing AI at the WEF to gullible EU politicians. Maybe someone like von der Leyen had a word with the current Italian government, which has caved on other issues as well. That's how the EU works.
- Version467 4y ago
  Wdym gullible? I'd hope that politicians and policy makers alike are keeping an eye on AI. Transformative AI isn't here yet, but it's coming and if politicians stay clueless until that day, then I don't have high hopes. I'd much rather see a lot of policy ideas thrown around, even if some of them don't turn out great. If Microsoft is the one making politicians notice that AI is important than I'm all for that, even if they have their own incentives. The default outcome is that they don't care at all until it's way too late.
  - wahnfrieden 4y ago
    You want new policies and laws?
    - flangola7 4y ago
      How is that even a question? AI will be the most powerful technology ever invented. More powerful than nuclear tech. Obviously it follows that we will need policies and laws at least as strong and comprehensive as those surrounding nuclear technology.
    - Version467 3y ago
      Absolutely. I'm surprised you find that noteworthy. I think it's very important that we: - slow down AI capabilities research - fast-track alignment and safety research - guide the development and integration of transformative ai into society by putting responsible policies in place It's obvious that ai offers an incredible opportunity for humanity. This could very well be the defining century for our species. But there are so many ways this can wrong. Even if alignment turns out to be easy, our society is just not ready to cope with the radical changes that transformative ai would bring. All of these challenges are solvable, but they require a dedicated effort from all involved players. We cannot afford a capabilities race and we cannot afford that just a handful of companies end up as the sole wielders of the most impactful technology to ever exist. Capabilities cannot come at the cost of safety and we need policymakers to enforce this. Self regulation is not going to solve this for us. Unfortunately, politicians have been years behind the curve when it comes to technological process. That's not good enough for transformative ai and so we need to get them in the loop now. So yes, I do want new policies and laws. And I do want people to go into politics and work on policies to help shape this future.
amai 4y ago
Are these new „privacy“ features also available for users based in the US?

120 points by jacooper 4y ago

it_citizen 4y ago

I wonder if they were looking for a way to back out without losing face or if those changes were genuinely enough.

arlort 4y ago
I'd say 50-50 This change by itself fixed a pretty big issue, but at the same time they probably realised they jumped the gun, especially with regards to the issues stemming from the training method
- habibur 4y ago
  I would have loved to see it go on at least for a year and then see what happens.
bonzini 4y ago
This is the full set of requests and outcomes (scroll for English): https://www.garanteprivacy.it/home/docweb/-/docweb-display/docweb/9881490 https://www.garanteprivacy.it/home/docweb/-/docweb-display/d... The only missing one is this: "introduced mechanisms to enable data subjects to obtain erasure of information that is considered inaccurate, whilst stating that it is technically impossible, as of now, to rectify inaccuracies". It is not clear to me however how one would request removal of information about themselves.

p-e-w 4y ago

Astonishing how governments just take foreign corporations by their word when they promise they won't use data for a certain purpose. For all we know (and I doubt the Italian government knows much more), they could have just added an "opt out" checkbox that does absolutely nothing.

Veen 4y ago
One has to assume some level of good faith, or it would be impossible to agree on anything. Plus, if OpenAI lied about this and it became known that they lied, they'd be shut down again and have much harder path back. Every privacy organization across the world would consider them an untrustworthy organization, and all good faith, friendly interaction would end.
- matheusmoreira 4y ago
  > One has to assume some level of good faith From the tech industry which known for its surveillance capitalism? They should be imposing regular audits of the systems as a pre-condition for allowing them to even exist.
- p-e-w 4y ago
  Technology corporations have been blatantly breaking European law for the past 15 years, and received multiple billion-dollar fines for it. Car manufacturers have committed fraud to deceive regulators into believing their products comply with emission standards. What "good faith" are you talking about?
  - avianlyric 4y ago
    Good faith that maybe they fixed it this time, and that even a multi-national company doesn’t have the stones to bold face lie to a government, when they’re under scrutiny for past deception. Without some level of good faith, there’s no path back for organisations. The only acceptable form of remediation would be dissolving the company entirely, which huge impacts on many people. Certainly past regulation has been a little toothless. But laws like GDPR with their maximum set as a percentage of global revenue show that governments are catching up. Those fines can be large enough to inflict real pain and damage to corporations that repeatedly misbehave.
    - p-e-w 4y ago
      > Those fines can be large enough to inflict real pain and damage to corporations that repeatedly misbehave. To my knowledge, such a large fine has never been imposed in 5 years, despite rampant noncompliance across the entire industry, including Big Tech, with countless complaints having been filed but gone nowhere.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

nmlax 4y ago

Nadella has been pushing AI at the WEF to gullible EU politicians. Maybe someone like von der Leyen had a word with the current Italian government, which has caved on other issues as well. That's how the EU works.

Version467 4y ago
Wdym gullible? I'd hope that politicians and policy makers alike are keeping an eye on AI. Transformative AI isn't here yet, but it's coming and if politicians stay clueless until that day, then I don't have high hopes. I'd much rather see a lot of policy ideas thrown around, even if some of them don't turn out great. If Microsoft is the one making politicians notice that AI is important than I'm all for that, even if they have their own incentives. The default outcome is that they don't care at all until it's way too late.
- wahnfrieden 4y ago
  You want new policies and laws?
  - flangola7 4y ago
    How is that even a question? AI will be the most powerful technology ever invented. More powerful than nuclear tech. Obviously it follows that we will need policies and laws at least as strong and comprehensive as those surrounding nuclear technology.
  - Version467 3y ago
    Absolutely. I'm surprised you find that noteworthy. I think it's very important that we: - slow down AI capabilities research - fast-track alignment and safety research - guide the development and integration of transformative ai into society by putting responsible policies in place It's obvious that ai offers an incredible opportunity for humanity. This could very well be the defining century for our species. But there are so many ways this can wrong. Even if alignment turns out to be easy, our society is just not ready to cope with the radical changes that transformative ai would bring. All of these challenges are solvable, but they require a dedicated effort from all involved players. We cannot afford a capabilities race and we cannot afford that just a handful of companies end up as the sole wielders of the most impactful technology to ever exist. Capabilities cannot come at the cost of safety and we need policymakers to enforce this. Self regulation is not going to solve this for us. Unfortunately, politicians have been years behind the curve when it comes to technological process. That's not good enough for transformative ai and so we need to get them in the loop now. So yes, I do want new policies and laws. And I do want people to go into politics and work on policies to help shape this future.

amai 4y ago

Are these new „privacy“ features also available for users based in the US?