I agree, we shouldn't be jumping to conclusions. Especially with flawed logic/reasoning like this: > it doesn't seem like there would be a reason for Meta to

I agree, we shouldn't be jumping to conclusions. Especially with flawed logic/reasoning like this: > it doesn't seem like there would be a reason for Meta to be ambiguous about answering, especially with all of the public commentary on the methods and data that companies use for training. There is another possible reason and it's not that hard to think of: they want to keep their options open. It's also possible that they don't want to play the game of "anything not explicitly My guess is that they are currently (or will in the future be) training on it, but I don't think we should take these statements as evidence of that. In general I think big tech is atrocious with private information, and if the average person knew the depth of the data they have, they would not stand for it. Certainly Meta doesn't have a great track record on the data front so there's no reason to think they'd be different. Unfortunately the average person thinks people like me are paranoid and/or crazy when I try to tell them about it. At best they just feel powerless and shrug and keep using the product anyway.