Tell HN: OpenAI keeps re-enabling the ‘allow training’ setting

告诉 HN：OpenAI 不断重新开启“允许训练”设置

I’ve reset this more than once and the last time I made a careful note of when I did it and to my surprise I found it re-enabled when I checked just now. Make sure you check this thing to see if it hasn’t been re-enabled if you believe it to be off right now. 我曾不止一次重置过这个设置，上一次我还特意记下了操作时间，但令我惊讶的是，刚才检查时发现它又被重新开启了。如果你认为自己目前已经关闭了该选项，请务必检查一下它是否已被重新开启。

ozgung: Happened to me recently, but on Claude. I resubscribed to Claude Code two weeks ago for a side project and updated it. I checked for the setting after these last events and it was turned on. I’m sure I checked them few months ago. There are cases like accepting a new TOS or an offer, which make you accept to share without noticing. I guess they can add all of your past conversations to the public training set before you notice and there is no way of taking this back. ozgung： 我最近也遇到了同样的情况，不过是在 Claude 上。两周前我为了一个副项目重新订阅了 Claude Code 并进行了更新。在看到最近的这些讨论后，我检查了该设置，发现它是开启的。我确定几个月前我检查过。有时候，接受新的服务条款（TOS）或优惠活动会让你在不知情的情况下同意分享数据。我猜他们可以在你察觉之前，就把你过去所有的对话都加入到公共训练集中，而且一旦加入就无法撤回。

So that “opt-out” thing is more like a pause button rather than a permanent thing. Or something to legally protect the company without losing the users. There is also the case of security classifiers always monitoring your conversations. If they flag something they use your conversations to “improve their internal models” even when you “opt-out”. 所以，那个“退出（opt-out）”选项更像是一个暂停按钮，而不是永久性的设置。或者说，这只是公司在不流失用户的前提下，用于法律自我保护的一种手段。此外，还有安全分类器会持续监控你的对话。如果它们标记了某些内容，即使你选择了“退出”，他们依然会利用你的对话来“改进其内部模型”。

ActionHank: Lol, “Outrageous that the company that chose to ignore copyright holder claims, chose to ignore my checkbox of intent despite the implied pinky promise”. ActionHank： 哈哈，“一家选择无视版权所有者主张的公司，竟然无视了我勾选的意愿选项，尽管他们曾做出过隐含的承诺，这真是太离谱了。”

quikoa: Exactly, they scrape the internet without any regard for copyright and now someone is surprised it happens to them. What’s next, subscribers believe they are paying customers instead of sponsored data providers? quikoa： 没错，他们肆无忌惮地抓取互联网数据，完全不顾版权，现在有人对发生在自己身上的事感到惊讶。接下来会怎样？订阅用户会以为自己是付费客户，而不是被赞助的数据提供商吗？

achrono: Ignoring the checkbox is an utterly offensive move, but repeatedly manipulating it contrary to stated consumer intent is a whole other level. I didn’t know we were supposed to take ‘frontier’ literally in every sense of the word. I have now witnessed this myself after not believing this at first. Of course, screenshots etc. will hardly prove anything. This needs a proper third-party audit! achrono： 无视复选框是一个极其冒犯的行为，但反复违背消费者的明确意愿去篡改它，则是另一个层面的问题了。我没想到我们竟然需要从字面意义上去理解“前沿（frontier）”这个词的每一层含义。起初我不相信，但现在我自己也亲眼见证了。当然，截图之类的证据很难证明什么。这需要进行一次正规的第三方审计！

taurath: Linkedin, Amazon and others have gotten around this by adding a “new” feature, default on. I’ve gone into privacy settings where everything is unchecked, except a newly added checkbox. This is apparently enough to hold up the broadly-accepted fiction that its possible to use these services while maintaining privacy and without risk. taurath： LinkedIn、亚马逊和其他公司通过添加一个默认开启的“新”功能来绕过这个问题。我曾进入隐私设置，发现所有选项都已取消勾选，唯独多了一个新添加的复选框。显然，这足以维持那种被广泛接受的虚构事实——即人们可以在保持隐私且无风险的情况下使用这些服务。