David Friedberg: AI Models are Training on YOUR DATA

Should they trust any of these LLMs with their proprietary knowledge for fear of having it cribbed into the core LLM? >> I have had experience where we've asked some fairly novel scientific questions and it identifies it as a novel insight. It's like, "Oh, never thought about that. It'd be interesting." Like, blah, blah, blah. And then using a different account, asking the same model later or the next version actually later, I've now experienced this. It's like, "Oh, well, you could do this." And it actually just describes this exact thing that we had in our chat in the previous version. Now, these are

a handful of anecdotal experiences, but I know the domain that we work in and the niche of it and the ID ideation of the stuff and the novelty of the stuff and the lack of papers being published and so on. So, I know that there isn't some new corpus of information out there that's training the new model. So, all I can say at that point is that my conversation or our analyses have been used for training. >> Okay, this does raise a really good question. What does it mean that the model's allowed to train on unidentifiable data? >> So, it doesn't use any of my personal information, but it can use an insight

derived from our chat, which it can then say is some training data that is unrelated, but the truth is it's actually a piece of IP that's for our our organizational's IP and our engagement back and forth. We don't have any NDA or confidentiality provisions or protections with them being a service provider back to us. This is why I care a lot about open source because I don't want them having my chat logs because they can use it for training to create an IP advantage that is now diffused to the rest of the market.