The only way to avoid Grammarly using your data for AI is to pay for 500 accounts - eviltoast

Source: https://front-end.social/@fox/110846484782705013

Text in the screenshot from Grammarly says:

We develop data sets to train our algorithms so that we can improve the services we provide to customers like you. We have devoted significant time and resources to developing methods to ensure that these data sets are anonymized and de-identified.

To develop these data sets, we sample snippets of text at random, disassociate them from a user’s account, and then use a variety of different methods to strip the text of identifying information (such as identifiers, contact details, addresses, etc.). Only then do we use the snippets to train our algorithms-and the original text is deleted. In other words, we don’t store any text in a manner that can be associated with your account or used to identify you or anyone else.

We currently offer a feature that permits customers to opt out of this use for Grammarly Business teams of 500 users or more. Please let me know if you might be interested in a license of this size, and I’II forward your request to the corresponding team.

  • Jaded@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    1·
    1 year ago

    What happens when every corporation and website closes their doors to AI? There isn’t any open source if we can’t use scrapped information from stack overflow, GitHub, Reddit etc.

    Sure some users will opt out but most won’t. Every single website will restrict though and then they will sell it to google and Microsoft who will be the only companies able to build ais.

    • kibiz0r@midwest.socialEnglish
      1·
      1 year ago

      If I could predict what happens to the tech market when XYZ policy is enacted, I wouldn’t be posting on Lemmy during my tea breaks. Whatever policies end up sticking around, success is gonna require a lot of us having ideas, trying them out, and recombining them.

      But I’ll claim this about my personal metric of “success”: If the future of open source looks like copying the extractive data-mining model of big tech and hoping we can shove the entire history of human thought into a blender faster than them, I think we’ve failed.