Assuming that DeepSeek really is logging keystrokes (they provided no evidence: who were they quoting?), that is unfortunately not uncommon. As shown by their TikTok pearl clutching, corporate media regularly goes for maximalist cold war fearmongering.
I’ve noticed that this “there is no proof!” or “where’s the evidence?” all of a sudden has become popular. You have people saying it even when they’re talking about a very specific statement of a fact that’s very specifically and easily verifiable.
that is unfortunately not uncommon
Completely true. A lot of web sites monitor everything you do on them, and can play it back for anyone who’s curious about optimizing the UX or for any other less innocent reason. Generally I think there’s not much specific in their privacy policy about it when they do. It’s not surprising that this one is also doing that, accompanied by really a pretty minor line in their privacy policy to go along with it, I completely agree with you here.
As shown by their TikTok pearl clutching, corporate media regularly goes for maximalist cold war fearmongering.
Personally, I wish the corporate media would pearl-clutch a little bit more about how explicitly malicious to our interests our computing devices have become. “Everyone does it, so it’s not a big deal after all” is a common take to have, but it’s the exact opposite of the one that I personally have on it.
Well, you did say it was “pearl clutching” and “fearmongering.” My point is, they should be clutching pearls, and fear should be mongered. Arguably, at all the social media companies including TikTok.
I actually do agree that TikTok is worse, but it’s hardly the point. We can be alarmed about all of them, especially since the US ones are now in the hands of an overtly evil tyrannical government instead of merely the sociopathic profit-minded corporatocracy they were in before.
You’re literally talking to people in a privacy forum hosted outside of corporate social media… and you think people don’t agree with you. We wouldn’t fucking be here if we weren’t already on the same page about such issues.
I’m talking to someone in a privacy forum hosted outside of corporate social media who described reports about privacy violations committed by a privacy-invasive social media app as pearl-clutching and fearmongering.
I’m not sure what your deal is, here, but I’m not into it. I feel like what I said was pretty straightforward and you’re determined to gin up some kind of disagreement, where I’m supposed to say that corporate media’s reporting on privacy isn’t bad, or something.
Privacy good, corporate privacy invasion bad. Corporate media underreporting of privacy violations bad. Hopefully that makes sense, and we can agree on it. I’m not into whatever argument you’re attempting to create about it.
Privacy good, corporate privacy invasion bad. Corporate media underreporting of privacy violations bad.
We never had an argument other than you keep positing that people don’t agree with this while they’re busy explaining to you that yes, they actually do, and you keep choosing to ignore that. “Corporate media underreporting of privacy violations bad” is literally what I spent several paragraphs explaining that you took as “yelling” and “disagreement.”
…but keep on arguing with people who actually agree with you and telling yourself they don’t.
Got it. Yeah, fair enough. What I was aiming to do, more or less, was ask for clarification, but I definitely see how it could come across as me trying to continue the argument when he was saying that he already agreed with me. I think you hopping into it with a big italic and bold wall of text on the thing that apparently all three of us already agree on only confused the issue further.
Anyway, sounds like we’re all on the same page. Cool.
Everyone does it, so it’s not a big deal after all
…and I think that’s you completely misreading what people are saying.
We’re saying that it’s bunk for the corporate media to portray it as this dangerous thing when they refuse to report similarly on US companies doing the same with the same ferocity.
I think most people agree with you, that our privacy protections are fucking abysmal and no company should be being allowed to do this stuff. Hell, that’s like the entire thrust of Ed Zitron’s entire fucking blog: that none of these companies should get away with this.
It’s like when Facebook got fined a paltry sum for being caught lying about their video metrics and literally putting businesses like CollegeHumor out of business because they “pivoted to facebook video” to grab those high metrics… which never materialized because Facebook was ratfucking lying to people. They should have been shut down and put out of business for that, not fined less than they made ripping off people.
People are sick of the companies here getting a pass, and the media gives them a pass. It’s more that you can’t make freaked out headlines like this about TikTok and DeepSeek and not understand that everyone is rolling their fucking eyes because we’re all like “it’s no worse than what US companies already do to us.” That doesn’t mean we like it or are okay with it. It means we’re rolling our eyes at a fucking insipid news media that’s obviously lying to us for the sake of private American companies profit, not because they care about rightfully informing American citizentry about what is happening.
All of us fucking hate it, but what the fuck do you expect us as individuals to do about it? Folks like me have been voting Blue for 25 fucking years with fuck-all to show for it on issues like these. So why’s it our job to explain that we don’t support it, we just think it’s dumb as fuck when a foreign company is doing the same thing and now suddenly that’s evil, but our guys doing it is somehow fine. What we have issue with is the hypocrisy.
Dude, why is this guy getting so upset about the suggestion that people should be alarmed both by TikTok and also by the malicious behavior of all the other social media companies? And that the media should report more on it? Why is he yelling so much at me for making what I thought was that fairly reasonable suggestion?
Folks like me have been voting Blue for 25 fucking years
Oh. Um… what? What does that… okay.
Edit: Oh, also, you were unnecessarily doing a bunch of obedience to the establishment if you’ve been voting blue for 25 years. Back in the Bill Clinton era, the parties really were practically indistinguishable, and there were other realistic options like Ralph Nader and Ron Paul on the table who were genuinely pretty good. They got creamed by FPTP, but right around the year 2000 was a time when almost anyone could see that the good options were not within either major party. Al Gore being a pretty obvious and rare exception. The calculus changed a lot with the last few elections, where the Republicans became such an objectively terrifying option that voting for the Democrat just so they wouldn’t get into office became a necessary strategy if you care about the country. In my opinion.
Yes. I also like how the alarming take on it is not “People are typing their passwords / medical histories / employer’s source code into ChatGPT and from there it goes straight into the training data not only to be stored forever in the corpus, but also sometimes, to be extracted at a later date by any yahoo who knows the way to tease it back out from ChatGPT via the right carefully crafted prompting!”
But instead it is “When you type things, they can see what you type! The keystrokes!”
I wouldn’t be so sure. China is at the world’s forefront of automated techniques to be able to spy on and manipulate people through their own devices at massive scale. If they had some semi-workable technology to fingerprint individuals through their typing patterns, in conjunction with fingerprinting the devices they were using through other means, that would make perfect sense to me.
I don’t think it is especially a concern for Deepseek specifically, for reasons discussed elsewhere in the comments. That one particular aspect of the privacy issue is probably being overblown, when there are other adjacent privacy and security concerns that are a lot more pressing. Honestly, that one particular detail isn’t really proven simply because it’s in the privacy policy, and even if they are doing something like that, its inclusion or not in this particular privacy policy or this app isn’t the particularly notable part about it.
Could they? Probably. Would it be valuable to an AI company? Probably not. Like most startups, they’re mostly shipping a minimal product as quick as possible.
they are actually training on this data (potentially). Its a fact. Only if you use some kind of special corporate license then they will not train on the data. (and you need to trust them on that)
Oh my god, that is such stupid detail to get hung up on then. There are actual problems with it like censorship and consequent potential untrustworthiness of the answers and THIS is what they decide is the worst thing.
Assuming that DeepSeek really is logging keystrokes (they provided no evidence: who were they quoting?), that is unfortunately not uncommon. As shown by their TikTok pearl clutching, corporate media regularly goes for maximalist cold war fearmongering.
https://platform.deepseek.com/downloads/DeepSeek Privacy Policy.html
Ctrl-F “rhythm”
I’ve noticed that this “there is no proof!” or “where’s the evidence?” all of a sudden has become popular. You have people saying it even when they’re talking about a very specific statement of a fact that’s very specifically and easily verifiable.
Completely true. A lot of web sites monitor everything you do on them, and can play it back for anyone who’s curious about optimizing the UX or for any other less innocent reason. Generally I think there’s not much specific in their privacy policy about it when they do. It’s not surprising that this one is also doing that, accompanied by really a pretty minor line in their privacy policy to go along with it, I completely agree with you here.
Personally, I wish the corporate media would pearl-clutch a little bit more about how explicitly malicious to our interests our computing devices have become. “Everyone does it, so it’s not a big deal after all” is a common take to have, but it’s the exact opposite of the one that I personally have on it.
That’s not my take, and I agree with you.
Well, you did say it was “pearl clutching” and “fearmongering.” My point is, they should be clutching pearls, and fear should be mongered. Arguably, at all the social media companies including TikTok.
I actually do agree that TikTok is worse, but it’s hardly the point. We can be alarmed about all of them, especially since the US ones are now in the hands of an overtly evil tyrannical government instead of merely the sociopathic profit-minded corporatocracy they were in before.
You’re literally talking to people in a privacy forum hosted outside of corporate social media… and you think people don’t agree with you. We wouldn’t fucking be here if we weren’t already on the same page about such issues.
That’s on you, dude.
I’m talking to someone in a privacy forum hosted outside of corporate social media who described reports about privacy violations committed by a privacy-invasive social media app as pearl-clutching and fearmongering.
I’m not sure what your deal is, here, but I’m not into it. I feel like what I said was pretty straightforward and you’re determined to gin up some kind of disagreement, where I’m supposed to say that corporate media’s reporting on privacy isn’t bad, or something.
Privacy good, corporate privacy invasion bad. Corporate media underreporting of privacy violations bad. Hopefully that makes sense, and we can agree on it. I’m not into whatever argument you’re attempting to create about it.
We never had an argument other than you keep positing that people don’t agree with this while they’re busy explaining to you that yes, they actually do, and you keep choosing to ignore that. “Corporate media underreporting of privacy violations bad” is literally what I spent several paragraphs explaining that you took as “yelling” and “disagreement.”
…but keep on arguing with people who actually agree with you and telling yourself they don’t.
Got it. Yeah, fair enough. What I was aiming to do, more or less, was ask for clarification, but I definitely see how it could come across as me trying to continue the argument when he was saying that he already agreed with me. I think you hopping into it with a big italic and bold wall of text on the thing that apparently all three of us already agree on only confused the issue further.
Anyway, sounds like we’re all on the same page. Cool.
Fair enough, sorry to be confusing to you.
…and I think that’s you completely misreading what people are saying.
We’re saying that it’s bunk for the corporate media to portray it as this dangerous thing when they refuse to report similarly on US companies doing the same with the same ferocity.
I think most people agree with you, that our privacy protections are fucking abysmal and no company should be being allowed to do this stuff. Hell, that’s like the entire thrust of Ed Zitron’s entire fucking blog: that none of these companies should get away with this.
It’s like when Facebook got fined a paltry sum for being caught lying about their video metrics and literally putting businesses like CollegeHumor out of business because they “pivoted to facebook video” to grab those high metrics… which never materialized because Facebook was ratfucking lying to people. They should have been shut down and put out of business for that, not fined less than they made ripping off people.
People are sick of the companies here getting a pass, and the media gives them a pass. It’s more that you can’t make freaked out headlines like this about TikTok and DeepSeek and not understand that everyone is rolling their fucking eyes because we’re all like “it’s no worse than what US companies already do to us.” That doesn’t mean we like it or are okay with it. It means we’re rolling our eyes at a fucking insipid news media that’s obviously lying to us for the sake of private American companies profit, not because they care about rightfully informing American citizentry about what is happening.
All of us fucking hate it, but what the fuck do you expect us as individuals to do about it? Folks like me have been voting Blue for 25 fucking years with fuck-all to show for it on issues like these. So why’s it our job to explain that we don’t support it, we just think it’s dumb as fuck when a foreign company is doing the same thing and now suddenly that’s evil, but our guys doing it is somehow fine. What we have issue with is the hypocrisy.
Dude, why is this guy getting so upset about the suggestion that people should be alarmed both by TikTok and also by the malicious behavior of all the other social media companies? And that the media should report more on it? Why is he yelling so much at me for making what I thought was that fairly reasonable suggestion?
Oh. Um… what? What does that… okay.
Edit: Oh, also, you were unnecessarily doing a bunch of obedience to the establishment if you’ve been voting blue for 25 years. Back in the Bill Clinton era, the parties really were practically indistinguishable, and there were other realistic options like Ralph Nader and Ron Paul on the table who were genuinely pretty good. They got creamed by FPTP, but right around the year 2000 was a time when almost anyone could see that the good options were not within either major party. Al Gore being a pretty obvious and rare exception. The calculus changed a lot with the last few elections, where the Republicans became such an objectively terrifying option that voting for the Democrat just so they wouldn’t get into office became a necessary strategy if you care about the country. In my opinion.
I literally explained it pretty clearly.
At this point its clear you want to misunderstand.
Interesting that you took a few paragraphs with a handful of explitives thrown in as “yelling.”
I assumed that they couldn’t have gotten that from the privacy policy itself, because I’d never seen one be so explicit.
They are quoting DeepSeek’s privacy policy. They say this before and after the first quote, and also link the policy at the top of the article.
Let’s be honest, ChatGPT is also logging keystrokes.
Yes. I also like how the alarming take on it is not “People are typing their passwords / medical histories / employer’s source code into ChatGPT and from there it goes straight into the training data not only to be stored forever in the corpus, but also sometimes, to be extracted at a later date by any yahoo who knows the way to tease it back out from ChatGPT via the right carefully crafted prompting!”
But instead it is “When you type things, they can see what you type! The keystrokes!”
And they probably aren’t even doing that. More likely, it’s just bot prevention.
I wouldn’t be so sure. China is at the world’s forefront of automated techniques to be able to spy on and manipulate people through their own devices at massive scale. If they had some semi-workable technology to fingerprint individuals through their typing patterns, in conjunction with fingerprinting the devices they were using through other means, that would make perfect sense to me.
I don’t think it is especially a concern for Deepseek specifically, for reasons discussed elsewhere in the comments. That one particular aspect of the privacy issue is probably being overblown, when there are other adjacent privacy and security concerns that are a lot more pressing. Honestly, that one particular detail isn’t really proven simply because it’s in the privacy policy, and even if they are doing something like that, its inclusion or not in this particular privacy policy or this app isn’t the particularly notable part about it.
Could they? Probably. Would it be valuable to an AI company? Probably not. Like most startups, they’re mostly shipping a minimal product as quick as possible.
they are actually training on this data (potentially). Its a fact. Only if you use some kind of special corporate license then they will not train on the data. (and you need to trust them on that)
maybe they harvest passwords on the side?
It doesn’t have access to all your keystrokes. An app can only harvest the keystrokes typed into it.
Oh my god, that is such stupid detail to get hung up on then. There are actual problems with it like censorship and consequent potential untrustworthiness of the answers and THIS is what they decide is the worst thing.