Most corporations likely have zero data retention agreements with LLM providers, at least for API usage.

(Sure, you could be sceptical on whether the LLM provider is upholding that, but I personally do trust them. The trust betrayal if ZDR wasn't actually ZDR would be too great and commercially damaging for them to lie.)

▲

dataflow 3 hours ago | parent [-]

> (Sure, you could be sceptical on whether the LLM provider is upholding that, but I personally do trust them. The trust betrayal if ZDR wasn't actually ZDR would be too great and commercially damaging for them to lie.)

Is actual ZDR verbiage in contracts more specific and limited in scope than what we see advertised publicly ("...except where needed to comply with law or combat misuse" in Anthropic's case)? Because those seem pretty damn vague and large enough holes to drive trucks through.

	▲	m11a 34 minutes ago \| parent \| next [-]
		It depends on the model provider. OpenAI's is very limited and precisely written. Plus, open-source models hosted on SaaS inference providers tend to come with a strong ZDR agreement too.
	▲	lukewarm707 2 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		to combat misuse, we must store and read all prompts and responses. ;) to comply with the law, we must send to the police our detections of illegal activity >:\| a guy subpeonaed your chats, i guess we stored them (oops) so now it's illegal to destroy it...