• 5 Posts
  • 55 Comments
Joined 2 years ago
cake
Cake day: June 1st, 2023

help-circle

  • Alright. I had to read up again on why this is newsworthy in the first place. Because of the language in their new ToS regarding usage of user data. The article I read, asked why they would only now update their terms despite the California Privacy Act having been in effect for a while now.

    I’m very sure, optimistically assuming they are honest and really didn’t change the way they handle user data, that an auditor found the previous wording of their ToS just not clear enough. Working in Quality Management and having attended quite a number of audits, this happens all the time. Company has a process for years, sometimes decades, but then needs to change the wording in a document because a new and overly by-the-books auditor will demand such to have it not only be “correct in spirit” but also “technically correct”. Nothing in the actual process needs to change.

    Again, this is me assuming that they really havent done something different in the way they handle data. Isn’t Firefox open-source? Could some savvy code-reader go through it to see if something about the data collection has changed?











  • Thanks for the explanation. I don’t understand enough about large language models to give a valuable judgement on this whole Deepseek happening from a technical standpoint. I think it’s excellent to have competition on the market and it feels that the US’ whole “But they’re spying on you and being a national security risk” is a hypocritical outcry when Facebook, OpenAI and the like still exist.

    What do you think about Deepseek? If I understood correctly, it’s being trained on the output of other LLMs, which makes it much more cheap but, to me it seems, also even less trustworthy because now all the actual human training data is missing and instead it’s a bunch of hallucinations, lies and (hopefully more often than not) correctly guessed answers to questions made by humans.