zlacker

>>chrono+(OP)
Called it a few days ago: >>37022827

It's baffling how many people in previous threads thought a company that gets most of its money from enterprise/business clients, will burn all their reputation by surreptitiously using client data to train their AI.

>>gruez+ch
Always wise to remember Hanlon's razor: "Never ascribe to malice that which is adequately explained by incompetence"

Occam's razor also applies here.

>>ec1096+8L
Let's please not pretend like philosophical razors are anything other than rhetorical devices. There's exactly zero data to back any of them up and it wouldn't matter if there was since each case is unique.

There is however research (that aligns with a lot of people's experience) to suggest psychopaths and sociopaths are very over represented in leadership:

https://www.sakkyndig.com/psykologi/artvit/babiak2010.pdf

>>hypeit+V41
I think as a rhetorical device it's good. Which is more likely: 1) Company has actively decided to burn all good will by being evil (we will use your private meeting content to train our ai without any way to opt out) 2) Company is dumb in their terms of service

The HN commenters tend to assume #1 when it comes to big companies, while more likely it's #2. The razors capture this situation well.