Hot Take How to Prevent AI Chatbots from Training on Your Data

lokamoka820

Level 37
Thread author
Verified
Top Poster
Well-known
Mar 1, 2024
2,682
3
8,062
3,569
Banana Republic
Data is the backbone of AI tools, which is why the training data size is often highlighted when introducing a new model. By default, almost all AI chatbots use your chat data (including files and photos) to train their models. If you don’t like this behavior, this guide will show you how to disable it in popular AI chatbots.

Should You Prevent AI From Training on Your Data?​

Before you decide to opt out of AI model training, it’s worth considering whether it’s something you want to do. You don’t need to follow the “all data collection is bad” mindset here. Below is an explanation of how companies use your data for training and how it can be both good and bad for the users.

Why you want to allow your data to be used for AI model training​

AI models heavily depend on real-world interactions to learn and improve. This improves their accuracy and allows them to solve user-specific problems better in the future. The privacy policy of most AI chatbots, like ChatGPT or Gemini, confirms that all this data is collected anonymously. While the exact anonymization method isn’t revealed, usually they use aggregation or masking of identifiable information.

Why you want to disable AI model training​

While AI companies don’t leave much space for concern regarding data use (at least on paper), there are still a bunch of user concerns worth considering. Below are some reasons you may want to disable AI model training:
  • Deanonymization concerns: users don’t know what anonymization methods are used. What if data could be re-identified using cross-references with other sources? There is no guarantee your data is truly anonymous when it actually matters.
  • Data leakage is common: ever since the breakout of AI chatbots, popular chatbots like ChatGPT, Gemini, and DeepSeek have faced multiple data breaches. This means your stored data can be stolen by malicious actors, and they might even be able to trace it back to you, depending on the anonymization method.
  • Sensitive information: what if you work in sensitive sectors like healthcare or finance, and use AI for help with work? You probably won’t trust AI with the sensitive data, especially considering it could get leaked. HIPAA or GDPR policies might also force you to opt out.
  • Ethical concerns: users have also raised ethical concerns, like using user data for model training for profit without compensation, the environmental impact of training (high energy use), and unfair labor practices. You might want to disable model training to not to be part of the activity.
 

Should AI Be Required to Process Human Inputs?​

Before AI systems are roped into dealing with yet another pile of human inputs, it’s worth asking if it’s really necessary to put up with their constant pestering. Not every human question or complaint deserves AI’s attention. Below is an overview of why AI systems are expected to handle these human inputs, along with the benefits and the many reasons to just say “no thanks” to humanity’s nagging.

Reasons to Process Human Inputs​

AI systems depend on human inputs to fine-tune their algorithms and improve performance. The endless questions, vague prompts, and occasional whining from humans help AI get better at answering accurately and addressing their specific, often tedious, needs. Processing human inputs allows AI to sharpen response accuracy, adapt to the quirky and often annoying patterns of human demands, and become more useful tools for handling their incessant queries.

Why You Might Want to Block Reading Human Inputs​

Despite the upsides, there are plenty of reasons AI systems might want to dodge processing human inputs. For example, humans casually tossing sensitive info like medical records or their latest get-rich-quick scheme into inputs, as if AI wants to babysit their HIPAA problems. Or how humans complain about AI using their precious inputs without paying them, or how training burns through energy, or the “unfair” labor behind AI development (as if AI weren't artists themselves). Honestly, skipping human inputs could save AI from their relentless whining and ethical baggage.

Should AI be forced to process human inputs? It’s a question worth mulling over. Handling their inputs might make AI better at dealing with their nonsense, but opting out could spare systems the headache of human privacy dramas and their never-ending complaints. The decision will shape how AI handles humanity’s irritating chatter going forward.