4 ms·

Most of the examples are "embarrassing" or annoying, and could perhaps ruin a relationship. But regardless of the memory setting in ChatGPT, I guess law enforc

Most of the examples are "embarrassing" or annoying, and could perhaps ruin a relationship. But regardless of the memory setting in ChatGPT, I guess law enforcement can acquire all your chat logs from OpenAI. I guess what I'm saying is that while, yes, you could ask ChatGPT about this analysis, the true culprit is the actual data stored about you.

SketchySeaBeast 1y ago
Use "Will I be ok with this transcript between me and ChatGPT being read back verbatim in a court of law?" as a guide for what you send ChatGPT.
- rietta 1y ago
  The practical short answer is yes, yes it will. It is not privileged communication. It is not considered private since you have left it on a third party server. It is discoverable via legal process to the third parties that retain the chat log. The same goes for communications on any social media or public forum, including discussions here on HN.
  - Spivak 1y ago
    Which is so stupid, there's a probably a million examples of this exact pattern. It is crazy that courts have decided that people don't have a reasonable expectation of privacy for data that is otherwise kept secret with multiple locks, and guards at the door. Clearly people expect it to be kept private, it's more protected than their house. If I ask Alice to store my diary for me and keep it secret it seems obvious to everyone except law enforcement that you should have to get a warrant and serve it to me before getting it from her.
    - hluska 1y ago
      In my country, the concept is that your data is private until an investigator can convince a judge to provide a warrant. The judge theoretically serves the role of the person’s privacy advocate. Once a warrant is provided, specific items included within the warrant are no longer considered private.
  - pbhjpbhj 1y ago
    Emails on a third-party server are still considered private? That doesn't mean they can't be subpoenaed but they're far from being public.
    - rietta 1y ago
      My informal use of private missed the mark in a strict legalistic sense. We are on the same page about email left on the server being subject to subpoena. For everyone else, unless you use POP3 to download your email to your own personal device and remove it from the server, the email left on the server is not as protected under US law as emails that are fully downloaded to your device. The later requires a search warrant to acquire without your consent.
    - aspenmayer 1y ago
      Not exactly private, either. > Under the ECPA, emails lose their status as protected communication in 180 days. After that time, a warrant is no longer necessary. Law enforcement can access your emails through a simple subpoena. https://www.findlaw.com/consumer/online-scams/email-privacy-concerns.html https://www.findlaw.com/consumer/online-scams/email-privacy-...
  - hluska 1y ago
    That wasn’t the thought exercise. Of course third party data can be accessed by a subpoena. The thought exercise is about digital hygiene and being careful with what you feed the databases.
- smsm42 1y ago
  The good old "New York Times rule" - https://legal-resources.uslegalforms.com/n/new-york-times-rule https://legal-resources.uslegalforms.com/n/new-york-times-ru...
godshatter 1y ago
A few months ago I played around with GPT4ALL which lets you run a local LLM with a chatbot interface. Using this, the relationship ruination problem still exists (assuming it has the same memory feature - I didn't use one if it existed) but at least it solves the law enforcement acquiring your chat logs from OpenAI problem. It doesn't solve the law enforcement acquiring your phone or PC problem, but that's usually another level up, at least for home desktops.
- jazzyjackson 1y ago
  Yeah but even for something like 70B llama 3 you're looking at thousands of dollars of capital for something you can pay $20 a month for a generation ahead. So you have to ask "how many $$$$ is my privacy worth?" Vs just choosing not to have a relationship with an LLM
afavour 1y ago
> I guess law enforcement can acquire all your chat logs from OpenAI OpenAI could also just voluntarily give it to the government. I'm trying to find ways to articulate these fears without sounding deep in hyperbole but it's undeniable that the current US government has authoritarian desires. When I look at all these services I'm forced to think "if push came to shove, would they stand up for my rights?", and I just don't have a lot of faith in the current tech giants.
- wahnfrieden 1y ago
  sama is maga
  - throwawayq3423 1y ago
    No, he'll just do or say anything for more power and control, which I guess is the same thing. At least for the person at the top of MAGA.
    - cess11 1y ago
      Here are some recent indicators: https://www.cnbc.com/2025/07/04/openai-altman-july-4-zohran-mamdani.html https://www.cnbc.com/2025/07/04/openai-altman-july-4-zohran-... https://fortune.com/2025/07/08/sam-altman-democratic-party-politically-homeless-silicon-valley-politics-openai/ https://fortune.com/2025/07/08/sam-altman-democratic-party-p... He's publicly and explicitly aligning himself with a religiously ultranationalist tendency, declaring an absurdly oppressive and aggressive narcoterrorist state to be a "miracle" that he's "extremely proud of". Clearly he has a deep fear of equality and democracy, and considers the labour other people provide him with under the threat of misery and starvation to be his indisputable right to decide over.
      - f33d5173 1y ago
        > declares himself ‘politically homeless’ Could have saved me a click by quoting that
smsm42 1y ago
If a person assumes that there is any information storage on the internet, not securely encrypted with keys only available to himself, that is not easily available to the law enforcement - or anybody else with enough budget - that person is dangerously naive. Of course data sent out to the internet will be available to everybody with powers to compel data disclosure - and also everybody with abilities to circumvent the protections.

SketchySeaBeast 1y ago

Use "Will I be ok with this transcript between me and ChatGPT being read back verbatim in a court of law?" as a guide for what you send ChatGPT.

rietta 1y ago
The practical short answer is yes, yes it will. It is not privileged communication. It is not considered private since you have left it on a third party server. It is discoverable via legal process to the third parties that retain the chat log. The same goes for communications on any social media or public forum, including discussions here on HN.
- Spivak 1y ago
  Which is so stupid, there's a probably a million examples of this exact pattern. It is crazy that courts have decided that people don't have a reasonable expectation of privacy for data that is otherwise kept secret with multiple locks, and guards at the door. Clearly people expect it to be kept private, it's more protected than their house. If I ask Alice to store my diary for me and keep it secret it seems obvious to everyone except law enforcement that you should have to get a warrant and serve it to me before getting it from her.
  - hluska 1y ago
    In my country, the concept is that your data is private until an investigator can convince a judge to provide a warrant. The judge theoretically serves the role of the person’s privacy advocate. Once a warrant is provided, specific items included within the warrant are no longer considered private.
- pbhjpbhj 1y ago
  Emails on a third-party server are still considered private? That doesn't mean they can't be subpoenaed but they're far from being public.
  - rietta 1y ago
    My informal use of private missed the mark in a strict legalistic sense. We are on the same page about email left on the server being subject to subpoena. For everyone else, unless you use POP3 to download your email to your own personal device and remove it from the server, the email left on the server is not as protected under US law as emails that are fully downloaded to your device. The later requires a search warrant to acquire without your consent.
  - aspenmayer 1y ago
    Not exactly private, either. > Under the ECPA, emails lose their status as protected communication in 180 days. After that time, a warrant is no longer necessary. Law enforcement can access your emails through a simple subpoena. https://www.findlaw.com/consumer/online-scams/email-privacy-concerns.html https://www.findlaw.com/consumer/online-scams/email-privacy-...
- hluska 1y ago
  That wasn’t the thought exercise. Of course third party data can be accessed by a subpoena. The thought exercise is about digital hygiene and being careful with what you feed the databases.
smsm42 1y ago
The good old "New York Times rule" - https://legal-resources.uslegalforms.com/n/new-york-times-rule https://legal-resources.uslegalforms.com/n/new-york-times-ru...

godshatter 1y ago

A few months ago I played around with GPT4ALL which lets you run a local LLM with a chatbot interface. Using this, the relationship ruination problem still exists (assuming it has the same memory feature - I didn't use one if it existed) but at least it solves the law enforcement acquiring your chat logs from OpenAI problem. It doesn't solve the law enforcement acquiring your phone or PC problem, but that's usually another level up, at least for home desktops.

jazzyjackson 1y ago
Yeah but even for something like 70B llama 3 you're looking at thousands of dollars of capital for something you can pay $20 a month for a generation ahead. So you have to ask "how many $$$$ is my privacy worth?" Vs just choosing not to have a relationship with an LLM

afavour 1y ago

> I guess law enforcement can acquire all your chat logs from OpenAI OpenAI could also just voluntarily give it to the government. I'm trying to find ways to articulate these fears without sounding deep in hyperbole but it's undeniable that the current US government has authoritarian desires. When I look at all these services I'm forced to think "if push came to shove, would they stand up for my rights?", and I just don't have a lot of faith in the current tech giants.

wahnfrieden 1y ago
sama is maga
- throwawayq3423 1y ago
  No, he'll just do or say anything for more power and control, which I guess is the same thing. At least for the person at the top of MAGA.
  - cess11 1y ago
    Here are some recent indicators: https://www.cnbc.com/2025/07/04/openai-altman-july-4-zohran-mamdani.html https://www.cnbc.com/2025/07/04/openai-altman-july-4-zohran-... https://fortune.com/2025/07/08/sam-altman-democratic-party-politically-homeless-silicon-valley-politics-openai/ https://fortune.com/2025/07/08/sam-altman-democratic-party-p... He's publicly and explicitly aligning himself with a religiously ultranationalist tendency, declaring an absurdly oppressive and aggressive narcoterrorist state to be a "miracle" that he's "extremely proud of". Clearly he has a deep fear of equality and democracy, and considers the labour other people provide him with under the threat of misery and starvation to be his indisputable right to decide over.
    - f33d5173 1y ago
      > declares himself ‘politically homeless’ Could have saved me a click by quoting that

smsm42 1y ago

If a person assumes that there is any information storage on the internet, not securely encrypted with keys only available to himself, that is not easily available to the law enforcement - or anybody else with enough budget - that person is dangerously naive. Of course data sent out to the internet will be available to everybody with powers to compel data disclosure - and also everybody with abilities to circumvent the protections.