Fighting the New York Times' invasion of user privacy

Re:Fighting the New York Times' invasion of user privacy by meV1 on Thursday November 13, 2025 @07:54AM (#45914333)

It ridiculous for OpenAI to attempt to claim some moral high-ground here. They're a company that has demonstrated zero respect for the copyright or data privacy regulations of other organisations. I think they take users dignity and rights with a grain of salt.

Their statements are all aspirational, "we're working toward de-identifying" etc. They've built one of the most powerful AIs ever seen and now they're claiming it's difficult to delete, de-identify / anonymize. Maybe they should ask their AI to do it :-)

It's impossible to take this company seriously. They're nothing but a carny barker stealing everything of value that they can lay their (creepy) hands on.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Fighting the New York Times' invasion of user privacy by perplex3d on Thursday November 13, 2025 @10:43AM (#45916221)

The “aspirational” language is what really stood out to me as well. “We’re building our privacy and security protections to match the responsibility” and “we are accelerating our security and privacy roadmap” and “our long term roadmap includes advanced security features designed to keep your data private, including client-side encryption” (what does this have to do with what OpenAI stores server-side?) and “we will build.” If OpenAI cared that much, then the privacy and security protections should be baked in rather than “tacked on.” Their statement makes me feel even less optimistic in their abilities to protect information.

[ Parent | on HN ]