this post was submitted on 13 Jun 2024
156 points (98.1% liked)

Technology

59534 readers
3209 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] XiozTzu@lemmy.world 1 points 5 months ago (3 children)

What data? The data that the user affirmatively agrees to send them that is anonymized? That data?

[–] NotAnotherLemmyUser@lemmy.world 18 points 5 months ago (2 children)

I'm sure you understand this, but anonymized data doesn't mean it can't be deanonymized. Given the right kind of data, or enough context they can figure out who you are fairly quickly.

Ex: You could "Anonymize" gps traces, but it would still show the house you live at and where you work unless you strip out a lot of the info.

http://androidpolice.com/strava-heatmaps-location-identity-doxxing-problem/

Now with LLMs, sure, you could "anonymize" which user said or asked for what... but if something identifying is sent in the request itself, it won't be hard to deanonymize that data.

[–] Zos_Kia@lemmynsfw.com 2 points 5 months ago

I don't know about the US but in European GDPR parlance, of it can be reversed then it is NOT anonymized and it is illegal to claim otherwise. The correct term is pseudonymized.

[–] NeptuneOrbit@lemmy.world 5 points 5 months ago

Still really valuable

[–] doodledup@lemmy.world 4 points 5 months ago (2 children)

The point is that they can use that data for further training. They want to build a monopoly like Google is for search.

[–] tal@lemmy.today 3 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

They want to build a monopoly like Google is for search.

There's Bing, and some others. I'm using Kagi. You can pretty much drop one in for another.

Google has a significant amount of marketshare, but it doesn't really have the ability to determine the terms on which a consumer can get access to search services, which is what lets a monopoly be a monopoly.

They've got a monopoly over providing some services to Android users, maybe.

[–] XiozTzu@lemmy.world 0 points 5 months ago

Like Google did with user queries and crawling data. I’m just saying everyone is happily giving these companies data. You are welcome to not use the GPT functionality just like you are welcome to use DuckDuckGo. I’m not getting the hostility to Apple. Microsoft on the other hand…