Hacker News Reader

Comment by wonderwonder | Hacker News Reader

This is insanity. Because one organization is suing another, citizens right to privacy is thrown right out the window?

Insane that NYT is driving this privacy nightmare.

And they are doing this over literally "old news". Expired for years, of no value.

Ofcourse the biased propaganda newspaper (i dont like fox news too) pretending to be defenders of liberty and the public, at it again !

You thought they weren't logging these before? I have a bridge to sell you.

I have no idea why you're downvoted. Why on earth would they delete their most valuable competitive advantage? Isn't it even in the fine print that you feed them training data by using their product, which at the very minimum is logged?

I thought the entire game these guys are playing is rushing to market to collect more data to diversify their supply chain from the stolen data they've used to train their current model. Sure, certain enterprise use cases might have different legal requirements, but certainly the core product and the average "import openai"-enjoyer.

> Why on earth would they delete their most valuable competitive advantage?

Becuase they are bound by their terms of service? Because if they won't no business would ever use their service and without businesses using their service they won't have any revenue?

you use internet and expect privacy? I have Enron stock option to sell you…

There is no need to be snarky. Just because the present internet is not great at privacy doesn't mean we can't hope for a future internet which is better at privacy.

The only hope I see is local LLMs, or Apple eventually doing something with encryption in the Secure Enclave.

local - 100%

apple I trust as much as I trust politicians

sent from my iphone :)

if the topic of conversation was whether or not we “hope for better future” I’d be all in. saying that today your “rights to privacy are being thrown out window” deserves a snarky remark :)

You don't have the right not to be logged

When a company makes an obligation to the user via policy to them, the court forcing the company to violate the obligation they've made to the user is violating an agreement the user entered into.

> When a company makes an obligation to the user via policy to them, the court forcing the company to violate the obligation they've made

To my knowledge, the court is forcing the company to change its policy. The obligation isn’t broken, its terms were just changed on a going-forward basis. (Would be different if the court required preserving records predating the order.)

Reply on news.ycombinator.com