• OwOarchist@pawb.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    ·
    1 day ago

    lol, that too. Who knows what kind of private legal information you’re freely feeding to the AI company.

    • chiliedogg@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      32
      ·
      1 day ago

      It’s worse than that. The AI isn’t part of the attorney/client relationship, so anything shared with it isn’t covered by privilege and is discoverable.

      • OwOarchist@pawb.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        edit-2
        1 day ago

        Supposedly.

        I wouldn’t trust anything to be truly private in the hands of these AI companies, though – they’re always scraping training data from wherever they can get it (legality be damned), and requests from enterprise clients are extremely valuable training data. They’ll make promises about how everything stays in-house … but then your chat history gets integrated into the new public model through its training, and maybe it’s now able to reproduce your private information when asked.

        • ryannathans@aussie.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          7
          ·
          24 hours ago

          That would be a massive legal dispute that would probably end up sinking them. There’s legal agreements they can’t train or use the data. Would blow reputation and be legal volcano

          • OwOarchist@pawb.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            9
            ·
            23 hours ago

            Are you and I seeing the same AI companies? They have 10 legal volcanoes per week … all part of ‘moving fast and breaking things’.