As it turns out, it’s impossible to remove a user’s data from a trained A.I. model. Deleting the model entirely is also difficult—and there’s little regulation to enforce either option.

I’m rather curious to see how the EU’s privacy laws are going to handle this.

(Original article is from Fortune, but Yahoo Finance doesn’t have a paywall)

  • @[email protected]English
    18•10 months ago

    So we just let them break the law without penalty because it’s hard and costly to redo the work that already broke the law? Nah, they can put time and money towards safeguards to prevent themselves from breaking the law if they want to try to make money off of this stuff.

    • @[email protected]English
      5•10 months ago

      No one has established that they’ve broken the law in any way, though. Authors are upset but it’s unclear if they can prove they were damaged in some way or that the companies in question are even liable for anything.

      Remember,the burden of proof is on the plaintiff not these companies if a suit is brought.

    • @[email protected]English
      2•10 months ago

      The “safeguard” would be “no PII in training data, ever”. Which is fine by me, but that’s what it really means. Retraining a large dataset every time a GDPR request comes in is completely infeasible.