24 ms·

Your data is not being used to train an LLM even if you click "yes" to this.

by jsnell 1y ago

notyourwork 1y ago
And meta hasn’t pirated the world’s library… it’s business as usual.
malfist 1y ago
And you know this how?
- Mordisquitos 1y ago
  To be fair, can you even know they won't do it if you click "no"?
- danpalmer 1y ago
  Disclaimer, I work at Google, but I recommend reading the ToS for Google consumer and business services, and I believe the short version of the policies on this have been documented on the Google blog several times. I can't comment on the policy directly, but encourage you to research it, there's a pretty straightforward answer. Separately, the industry standard elsewhere appears to be that if you're a free user your data is used for training, and if you're a paying user it's not.
  - darthcloud 1y ago
    It's so straightforward that you can't comment on it without risking retaliation?
    - blitzar 1y ago
      Don't Talk to the Police. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d-7o9xYp7eE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d-7o9xYp7eE
  - selcuka 1y ago
    I am either reading the wrong ToS, or not getting it [1]: Permission to use your content [...] This license is for the limited purpose of: [...] - developing new technologies and services for Google consistent with these terms The last item sounds like Google can use my content to train an LLM, no? [1] https://policies.google.com/terms?hl=en-US#toc-content https://policies.google.com/terms?hl=en-US#toc-content
    - danpalmer 1y ago
      Do you have a free or paid account? What are the terms for paid accounts?
      - selcuka 1y ago
        I had assumed that the GP comment [1] was about both paid and free accounts. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44592213 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44592213
- jsnell 1y ago
  Workspace has published policies about how the customer's data may be used: https://support.google.com/a/answer/15706919 https://support.google.com/a/answer/15706919 > Your content is not used for any other customers. Your content is not human reviewed or used for Generative AI model training outside your domain without permission. And I think the default assumption has to be that those policies are actually followed. If you think they aren't, the burden of proof is on you to show they aren't.
  - a0123 1y ago
    What the OP of that comment and yourself have missed is that Google is not trustworthy enough to give it permission, which the user you're responding to pretty much suggested as a solution (Google should be trustworthy to be given a one-off permission). The amount of times Google has been caught out doing things they shouldn't be means that no, no one has to prove that it's a reasonable assumption that Google follows policies, not even their own. It's for you to prove that they can be trusted (good luck with that!).
    - mvdtnz 1y ago
      In that case what do you care if you click yes or no? If you don't trust Google to abide by their own terms what makes you think they'll respect your "no"? Surely at that level of trust you would just stop using their product?

Your data is not being used to train an LLM even if you click "yes" to this.

by jsnell 1y ago

Your data is not being used to train an LLM even if you click "yes" to this.

notyourwork 1y ago

And meta hasn’t pirated the world’s library… it’s business as usual.

malfist 1y ago

And you know this how?

Mordisquitos 1y ago
To be fair, can you even know they won't do it if you click "no"?
danpalmer 1y ago
Disclaimer, I work at Google, but I recommend reading the ToS for Google consumer and business services, and I believe the short version of the policies on this have been documented on the Google blog several times. I can't comment on the policy directly, but encourage you to research it, there's a pretty straightforward answer. Separately, the industry standard elsewhere appears to be that if you're a free user your data is used for training, and if you're a paying user it's not.
- darthcloud 1y ago
  It's so straightforward that you can't comment on it without risking retaliation?
  - blitzar 1y ago
    Don't Talk to the Police. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d-7o9xYp7eE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d-7o9xYp7eE
- selcuka 1y ago
  I am either reading the wrong ToS, or not getting it [1]: Permission to use your content [...] This license is for the limited purpose of: [...] - developing new technologies and services for Google consistent with these terms The last item sounds like Google can use my content to train an LLM, no? [1] https://policies.google.com/terms?hl=en-US#toc-content https://policies.google.com/terms?hl=en-US#toc-content
  - danpalmer 1y ago
    Do you have a free or paid account? What are the terms for paid accounts?
    - selcuka 1y ago
      I had assumed that the GP comment [1] was about both paid and free accounts. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44592213 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44592213
jsnell 1y ago
Workspace has published policies about how the customer's data may be used: https://support.google.com/a/answer/15706919 https://support.google.com/a/answer/15706919 > Your content is not used for any other customers. Your content is not human reviewed or used for Generative AI model training outside your domain without permission. And I think the default assumption has to be that those policies are actually followed. If you think they aren't, the burden of proof is on you to show they aren't.
- a0123 1y ago
  What the OP of that comment and yourself have missed is that Google is not trustworthy enough to give it permission, which the user you're responding to pretty much suggested as a solution (Google should be trustworthy to be given a one-off permission). The amount of times Google has been caught out doing things they shouldn't be means that no, no one has to prove that it's a reasonable assumption that Google follows policies, not even their own. It's for you to prove that they can be trusted (good luck with that!).
  - mvdtnz 1y ago
    In that case what do you care if you click yes or no? If you don't trust Google to abide by their own terms what makes you think they'll respect your "no"? Surely at that level of trust you would just stop using their product?