Hacker News Reader

Comment by bigfish24 | Hacker News Reader

Opt out doesn’t guarantee they can’t train on “your” data. Legally the reasoning tokens are ambiguous in terms of ownership. Explained this here https://fortune.com/2026/08/26/alex-karp-was-right-you-dont-...

View on HN

Edit: the parent comment now seems to better reflect the below.

That article is only saying when you opt out there may be a loophole in the terms to allow OpenAI to train on the intermittent reasoning data anyways. If you don't opt out there is no ambiguity, all of the data can clearly be trained on.

So you have to opt out, it's just argued it's not clear from the terms that will also opt out of training on reasoning data or not.

We come back to the rule: "The cloud is just someone else's computer".

The way for people or companies or universities to control their data and information is to keep it on their own computers.

Solid legal agreements work fine for companies or universities, you just don't usually get that with standard user ToSes.

Depends on how much risk they are willing to accept. What is strange here is that it's clear that OpenAI is both a service provider and a competitor to mathematicians. It almost reminds me of Amazon which both hosts external merchants and competes with them, sometimes copying their stuff. Similar but not the same.

This would be a fairly insane breach of trust and common sense if true; the chain-of-thought / reasoning trace is, from an information perspective, close to a superset of the prompt and model response.

And, of course, you can train a model to start with repeating prompt in chain of thought!

how is this different than translating user prompts to a different language (eg English => Dutch), retaining the translation and using it for training, while telling the user that he's technically covered under ZRP? article locked for me

Reply on news.ycombinator.com