3 ms·
I cannot help wondering if the 'we won't train on your data' applies across the fence over there in pentagon land, where the classified contracts be. Yeah, of c
by eth0up 4mo ago
I cannot help wondering if the 'we won't train on your data' applies across the fence over there in pentagon land, where the classified contracts be. Yeah, of course they are not connected. Or..
Present user-llm activity is a goldmine of intel the agencies literally spent lives and billions on getting hardly close to, yet they elect to just let this one slip by..
Maybe. Really, I don't dispute it.
But why? It's what, or precisely what, they always dreamed of.
- arcanemachiner 4mo agoWe've already gone through ECHELON, USAPATRIOT, TIA, PRISM, etc.. Either learn from the pattern and and plan accordingly, or be one of the credulous rubes caught off guard in the next wave of leaks.
- daveshistory 4mo agoI don't know why you'd read literally the last 25 years of leaks from mass surveillance programs and think for one moment that they've just, gosh, overlooked the opportunities.
- rapnie 4mo ago> We won’t use this data to train new Claude models, or for any non-safety-related purpose, and we’ve instituted new privacy protections including logging all human access to the data and ensuring its deletion after 30 days in almost all cases This reads to me as they can use any model that is not a "Claude model", and as for human access to that other model there can be different less restrictive privacy protections. In other words, that anything goes.
- eth0up 4mo agoYes. Words don't mean much these days. Taking corporate doublespeak at face value seems very couragious to me.