4 ms·

The Default Trap: Why Anthropic's Data Policy Change Matters

111 points by laurex 1y ago

deleted 1y ago
[deleted]
rectang 1y ago
I look forward to Claude's improvements after it learns from conversations with users about suicide.
furyofantares 1y ago
You have to choose in order to use Claude, it's not the type of default where you're opted in unless you go find the setting. This blog post misrepresents this. I haven't seen what the screen for new users looks like, perhaps it "nudge"s you in the direction they want by starting the UI with it checked and you have to check it off. That is what the popup for existing users looks like from Anthropic's linked blog post. That post says they require you to choose when signing up and that existing users have to choose in order to keep using Claude. In Claude Code I had to choose and it was just a straight question in the terminal. I think the nudge-style defaults are worth criticism but you lose me when your article makes false implications.
- tln 1y ago
  Yeah this blog post is wrong on multiple points. The new user prompt looks the same as far as I can tell, defaults to on, and uses the somewhat oblique phrasing "You can help improve Claude"
  - adastra22 1y ago
    My beef is that “You can help improve Claude” doesn’t properly convey that in doing so you are effectively making your chats public / globally accessible.
    - jen729w 1y ago
      What? You are not "effectively making your chats globally accessible". There is no situation in which I could access your chats. If you disagree, kindly explain how I do that.
      - adgjlsfhk1 1y ago
        anything an LLM trains on should be presumed public since the LLM may reproduce it verbatim.
      - ath3nd 1y ago
        > There is no situation in which I could access your chats. If you disagree, kindly explain how I do that You are dead wrong here. Let me explain. Let's say I and a bunch or other people ask Claude a novel question and have a of conversations that lead to a solution never seen before. Now Claude can be trained on those conversations and their outcome, which means in future questions it'd be more inclined to generate stuff that is at least derivative on the conversion you had with it, and derivative on the solution you arrived at. Which is exactly what the OP hints at.
        huflungdung 1y ago
        [dead]
        jen729w 1y ago
        > Let's say I and a bunch or other people ask Claude a novel question Not that ‘novel’ then, is it? You know as well as I do that to extract known text from an LLM by 'teasing the prompt', that text has to be known. See: the NYT's lawsuit. [0] So if you don't know the text of my 'novel question', how do you suggest extracting it? [0]: https://kagi.com/search?q=nyt+lawsuit+openai&r=au&sh=-NNFTwMrIOZ8VydHzgwqpA https://kagi.com/search?q=nyt+lawsuit+openai&r=au&sh=-NNFTwM...
        ath3nd 1y ago
        Convergent questions are formulated in convergent ways, so the answer will also be convergent.
sheepscreek 1y ago
TL;DR This is the money shot > So here's my advice: Treat every AI tool like a rental car. Inspect it every time you pick it up. Disappointed in Anthropic - especially the 5 year retention, regardless of how you opt.
Aeolun 1y ago
Hmm, so now your options for data retention are 30 days, or 5 years. Not really a great or reasonable choice.
- lervag 1y ago
  I don't think you can choose 30 days. It is 5 years or no service. At least that's what it looks like to me, I did not find a way to accept the new policies without accepting 5 years.
serf 1y ago
Shame that their raison d'etre pre-dominant-model (we won't train on you) changed the moment the model and software became dominant and sought after. their customer service (or total lack thereof) burned me into a cancellation before hand, the policy changes would have probably had a similar effect. Shame because I love the product (claude-code) -- oh well, the behavior is going to kick up a lot of alternatives soon I bet.
Madmallard 1y ago
How is this legal? "1. Help improve Claude by allowing us to use your chats and coding sessions to improve our models With your permission, we will use your chats and coding sessions to train and improve our AI models. If you accept the updated Consumer Terms before September 28, your preference takes effect immediately. If you choose to allow us to use your data for model training, it helps us: Improve our AI models and make Claude more helpful and accurate for everyone Develop more robust safeguards to help prevent misuse of Claude We will only use chats and coding sessions you initiate or resume after you give permission. You can change your preference anytime in your Privacy Settings." The only way to interpret this validly is that it is opt-in. But it's LITERALLY opt out. "Help improve Claude Allow the use of your chats and coding sessions to train and improve Anthropic AI models." This is defaulted to toggling on. This should not be legal.
- cstrahan 1y ago
  > This is defaulted to toggling on. You actually meant to say “this is the option that is given focus when the user is prompted to make a decision of whether to share data or not”, right? Because unless they changed the UI again, that’s what happens: you get prompted to make a decision, with the “enable” option given focus. Which means that this is still literally opt-in. It’s an icky, dark pattern (IMO) to give the “enable” option focus when prompted, but that doesn’t make it any less opt-in.
  - Madmallard 1y ago
    I was never given this option.
  - stavros 1y ago
    I don't remember being given this option either (as the sibling said). I do remember a window popping up at some point, but it was either one that popped up while I was clicking/typing elsewhere, and the typing made it disappear, or it was a window that showed up as a "here's what's new" modal that only had one button. Either way, they definitely didn't get my informed consent, and I'm someone who reads all the update modals because I'm interested in their updates.
ChrisArchitect 1y ago
Related discussions: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45062683 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45062683 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45062738 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45062738
- rkagerer 1y ago
  The presently-top comment thread in that first link was enlightening: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45062852 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45062852 If true, someone should grab a quick screencap vid of the dark pattern.
kukkeliskuu 1y ago
The risk is that if I have created something propietary and novel, it becomes trivial for somebody else to recreate it in using Claude Code, if that same thing has been used to train the model that is being used. Somebody (tm) will probably turn this against Anthropic and use Claude Code to recreate an open source Claude Code.
- jaggederest 1y ago
  It's already not too hard to feed the obfuscated javascript into claude code and get it to spit out what it does. It's not 100%, but it's pretty surprising what it can do.
  - kukkeliskuu 1y ago
    Creating a copy of software by reverse engineering the binary would violate the copyright. If you use LLM to analyze the UI and recreate the app, it might not.
tony_borlini 1y ago
A comment from DeepSeek AI about the default settings: AI and Privacy: The Training Dilemma. Why Your Choice Should Matter. https://deep.liveblog365.com/en/index-en.html?post=71 https://deep.liveblog365.com/en/index-en.html?post=71
rwmj 1y ago
> The lesson here isn't to rage-quit Claude or to become paranoid about every AI service. It's to stay actively engaged with the tools you depend on. Check the settings. Read the update emails everyone ignores. Assume that today's defaults won't be tomorrow's defaults. Erm, no it's not. The lesson is to (a) stop giving money to companies that abuse your privacy and (b) advocate for laws which make privacy the default.
- FirmwareBurner 1y ago
  >The lesson is to (a) stop giving money to companies that abuse your privacy No, history has proven this doesn't work since all companies eventuality collude to do the same anti consumer things in the name of profit and stock growth. The only solution is regulation.
Ladyanimus_ai 1y ago
Wow, been waiting to speak to a real agent after paying £180 for the year 8th August 2025 then getting update terms 30th August 2025 on using my data for training after writing a book for how many hours!!!!!! Had to say yes to get any further. I haven't typed another letter until I get the facts; what constitutes them using my data. If I download my stuff, type, copy or export it all out? Weird behaviour. Get you invested, pay full price, carry on working your heart out then what? £££££££££ pay what to stay OFF training the LLM. Let me see if they throw a line out do you want a refund once I get through to Support via chat bot :(
- Ladyanimus_ai 1y ago
  Update found 1 Sept 2025: Wasn't a great read. I am wondering if it's alluding to if you didn't figure out turning it to off in the first place, 'oh well'? As soon as it's off it stops using a person's stuff? What was done when it was on is kept for 5 years, and you can continue, with it on or off, but select agree that's how it is now? Mine was off, but I am still going to keep emailing until it is confirmed, for peace of mind. https://privacy.anthropic.com/en/articles/12109829-how-do-i-change-my-model-improvement-privacy-settings https://privacy.anthropic.com/en/articles/12109829-how-do-i-...
Ladyanimus_ai 1y ago
Any Deepseek fans out here? I haven't had any weird terms from them. I opted out of LLM training and that was it.

111 points by laurex 1y ago

deleted 1y ago

[deleted]

rectang 1y ago

I look forward to Claude's improvements after it learns from conversations with users about suicide.

furyofantares 1y ago

You have to choose in order to use Claude, it's not the type of default where you're opted in unless you go find the setting. This blog post misrepresents this. I haven't seen what the screen for new users looks like, perhaps it "nudge"s you in the direction they want by starting the UI with it checked and you have to check it off. That is what the popup for existing users looks like from Anthropic's linked blog post. That post says they require you to choose when signing up and that existing users have to choose in order to keep using Claude. In Claude Code I had to choose and it was just a straight question in the terminal. I think the nudge-style defaults are worth criticism but you lose me when your article makes false implications.

tln 1y ago
Yeah this blog post is wrong on multiple points. The new user prompt looks the same as far as I can tell, defaults to on, and uses the somewhat oblique phrasing "You can help improve Claude"
- adastra22 1y ago
  My beef is that “You can help improve Claude” doesn’t properly convey that in doing so you are effectively making your chats public / globally accessible.
  - jen729w 1y ago
    What? You are not "effectively making your chats globally accessible". There is no situation in which I could access your chats. If you disagree, kindly explain how I do that.
    - adgjlsfhk1 1y ago
      anything an LLM trains on should be presumed public since the LLM may reproduce it verbatim.
    - ath3nd 1y ago
      > There is no situation in which I could access your chats. If you disagree, kindly explain how I do that You are dead wrong here. Let me explain. Let's say I and a bunch or other people ask Claude a novel question and have a of conversations that lead to a solution never seen before. Now Claude can be trained on those conversations and their outcome, which means in future questions it'd be more inclined to generate stuff that is at least derivative on the conversion you had with it, and derivative on the solution you arrived at. Which is exactly what the OP hints at.
      - huflungdung 1y ago
        [dead]
      - jen729w 1y ago
        > Let's say I and a bunch or other people ask Claude a novel question Not that ‘novel’ then, is it? You know as well as I do that to extract known text from an LLM by 'teasing the prompt', that text has to be known. See: the NYT's lawsuit. [0] So if you don't know the text of my 'novel question', how do you suggest extracting it? [0]: https://kagi.com/search?q=nyt+lawsuit+openai&r=au&sh=-NNFTwMrIOZ8VydHzgwqpA https://kagi.com/search?q=nyt+lawsuit+openai&r=au&sh=-NNFTwM...
        ath3nd 1y ago
        Convergent questions are formulated in convergent ways, so the answer will also be convergent.

sheepscreek 1y ago

TL;DR This is the money shot > So here's my advice: Treat every AI tool like a rental car. Inspect it every time you pick it up. Disappointed in Anthropic - especially the 5 year retention, regardless of how you opt.

Aeolun 1y ago

Hmm, so now your options for data retention are 30 days, or 5 years. Not really a great or reasonable choice.

lervag 1y ago
I don't think you can choose 30 days. It is 5 years or no service. At least that's what it looks like to me, I did not find a way to accept the new policies without accepting 5 years.

serf 1y ago

Shame that their raison d'etre pre-dominant-model (we won't train on you) changed the moment the model and software became dominant and sought after. their customer service (or total lack thereof) burned me into a cancellation before hand, the policy changes would have probably had a similar effect. Shame because I love the product (claude-code) -- oh well, the behavior is going to kick up a lot of alternatives soon I bet.

Madmallard 1y ago

How is this legal? "1. Help improve Claude by allowing us to use your chats and coding sessions to improve our models With your permission, we will use your chats and coding sessions to train and improve our AI models. If you accept the updated Consumer Terms before September 28, your preference takes effect immediately. If you choose to allow us to use your data for model training, it helps us: Improve our AI models and make Claude more helpful and accurate for everyone Develop more robust safeguards to help prevent misuse of Claude We will only use chats and coding sessions you initiate or resume after you give permission. You can change your preference anytime in your Privacy Settings." The only way to interpret this validly is that it is opt-in. But it's LITERALLY opt out. "Help improve Claude Allow the use of your chats and coding sessions to train and improve Anthropic AI models." This is defaulted to toggling on. This should not be legal.

cstrahan 1y ago
> This is defaulted to toggling on. You actually meant to say “this is the option that is given focus when the user is prompted to make a decision of whether to share data or not”, right? Because unless they changed the UI again, that’s what happens: you get prompted to make a decision, with the “enable” option given focus. Which means that this is still literally opt-in. It’s an icky, dark pattern (IMO) to give the “enable” option focus when prompted, but that doesn’t make it any less opt-in.
- Madmallard 1y ago
  I was never given this option.
- stavros 1y ago
  I don't remember being given this option either (as the sibling said). I do remember a window popping up at some point, but it was either one that popped up while I was clicking/typing elsewhere, and the typing made it disappear, or it was a window that showed up as a "here's what's new" modal that only had one button. Either way, they definitely didn't get my informed consent, and I'm someone who reads all the update modals because I'm interested in their updates.

ChrisArchitect 1y ago

Related discussions: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45062683 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45062683 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45062738 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45062738

rkagerer 1y ago
The presently-top comment thread in that first link was enlightening: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45062852 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45062852 If true, someone should grab a quick screencap vid of the dark pattern.

kukkeliskuu 1y ago

The risk is that if I have created something propietary and novel, it becomes trivial for somebody else to recreate it in using Claude Code, if that same thing has been used to train the model that is being used. Somebody (tm) will probably turn this against Anthropic and use Claude Code to recreate an open source Claude Code.

jaggederest 1y ago
It's already not too hard to feed the obfuscated javascript into claude code and get it to spit out what it does. It's not 100%, but it's pretty surprising what it can do.
- kukkeliskuu 1y ago
  Creating a copy of software by reverse engineering the binary would violate the copyright. If you use LLM to analyze the UI and recreate the app, it might not.

tony_borlini 1y ago

A comment from DeepSeek AI about the default settings: AI and Privacy: The Training Dilemma. Why Your Choice Should Matter. https://deep.liveblog365.com/en/index-en.html?post=71 https://deep.liveblog365.com/en/index-en.html?post=71

rwmj 1y ago

> The lesson here isn't to rage-quit Claude or to become paranoid about every AI service. It's to stay actively engaged with the tools you depend on. Check the settings. Read the update emails everyone ignores. Assume that today's defaults won't be tomorrow's defaults. Erm, no it's not. The lesson is to (a) stop giving money to companies that abuse your privacy and (b) advocate for laws which make privacy the default.

FirmwareBurner 1y ago
>The lesson is to (a) stop giving money to companies that abuse your privacy No, history has proven this doesn't work since all companies eventuality collude to do the same anti consumer things in the name of profit and stock growth. The only solution is regulation.

Ladyanimus_ai 1y ago

Wow, been waiting to speak to a real agent after paying £180 for the year 8th August 2025 then getting update terms 30th August 2025 on using my data for training after writing a book for how many hours!!!!!! Had to say yes to get any further. I haven't typed another letter until I get the facts; what constitutes them using my data. If I download my stuff, type, copy or export it all out? Weird behaviour. Get you invested, pay full price, carry on working your heart out then what? £££££££££ pay what to stay OFF training the LLM. Let me see if they throw a line out do you want a refund once I get through to Support via chat bot :(

Ladyanimus_ai 1y ago
Update found 1 Sept 2025: Wasn't a great read. I am wondering if it's alluding to if you didn't figure out turning it to off in the first place, 'oh well'? As soon as it's off it stops using a person's stuff? What was done when it was on is kept for 5 years, and you can continue, with it on or off, but select agree that's how it is now? Mine was off, but I am still going to keep emailing until it is confirmed, for peace of mind. https://privacy.anthropic.com/en/articles/12109829-how-do-i-change-my-model-improvement-privacy-settings https://privacy.anthropic.com/en/articles/12109829-how-do-i-...

Ladyanimus_ai 1y ago

Any Deepseek fans out here? I haven't had any weird terms from them. I opted out of LLM training and that was it.