> Unless they move ChatGPT in house, privacy assurances are just words on a piece of paper.
No, these are words that are enforced by law. As much as Microsoft might want to take a peak, it would be financially ruinous
No, these are words that are enforced by law. As much as Microsoft might want to take a peak, it would be financially ruinous
There are ways to set up incentives such that large corporations will follow the rules. There are myriad examples of this. But in most cases you can ask what is more profitable: Taking $1B+ a year from Apple for hosting an internal ChatGPT service from them, or maybe, if they're lucky, stealing trade secret that MS will never be able to compete against Apple with anyway?
This is all hypothetical; I just want to point out that these businesses are not just waiting to do evil things, they simply respond to incentives, like any business.
That's been a major problem at Amazon where they launch competitors to their biggest and most successful marketplace sellers' cash cows
Businesses put a ton of trust in contracts—with hefty penalties for breaking them—all the time. Our entire economy is built on this.
Yes, that was part of my point.
Contracts are a mechanism that are heavily relied upon, no question about it. But their role is really more about making the terms of a deal crystal clear. In terms of legal enforceability, that is certainly a very important thing, but it's not like contract are a panacea. As the old saying goes, a contract is only as good as your ability to enforce it is, and lots of contract violations go unpunished simply because the one who was violated can't afford to sue.