But it isn't worthless because the user is paying for that, and third parties are paying for that as well. Unless the input output is completely different, which it's not because you are human, and I bet you have a profession which other humans have, and many other qualities which you share with other humans.
In any case, relying on the chance that the LLM inference won't train on your data because of it's presumably low value is as good a strategy as crossing your fingers or venerating the god of rain. You should be relying on contractual clauses at least when including professional and client data.
Wow I thought this was quite obvious, apparently not, so I'll explain.
Llm provider sells usage of their model.
You use it to write code.
Other clients use it to write code as well.
If the llm provider trains with user data, then the usage benefits other users.
If you pay the company to generate code,then by definition it is useful, and highly likely that other customers care about it.
Replace writing code with anything, a lawyer, a psychologist, a confessional. The IO is inherently useful to users of the same category.
That is to say nothing of adversarial use, that is, being useful because a counterparty might find it useful, so an attacker might find common code patterns, a lawyer might see what the opposition might be advised, a boy might see what a girl asks or gets advised, etc..
If this sounds too complex to you, just think of training on data as exfiltration with added steps, because that's what it is
There are basically two kinds of people in the world, ones that create stuff, and ones that destroys stuff.
Defense is a toally different game, and requires a complete new mindset than creativity. Security is something that you miss one then you lose all.
AIs are good at choosing a good candidate based on a reward model, but it sucks hard at enumerating mundane attack surfaces and make combinations to exploit through.
Good engineering is good engineering. Belief that someone else uniquely possesses the skill to engineer some critical part of a system you built is, for me, just abdicating responsibility. It's a learned helplessness.
Someone else blindly operating an llm on a corpus you created with an llm is comical.
Are you the best choice to engineer everything your system does? There is no one in your company that might do a better job than you for a specific part of the system?
There is nothing wrong with asking for help or bouncing ideas of people with stronger skills.
I still have the responsibility to code XYZ well. But I don’t have to do it in a clean room.
Or even better. XML + XLST.
True separation of representation and data.
Is thousands of nested <div> really a good idea?
reply