@jernej__s @brazmogu @gabrielesvelto ... sucking power and water like a tiny country while doing it. For every request. They should be closed down, but it's not illegal to consume so much resources if you're paying for it.

@jernej__s @gabrielesvelto there are a couple of different answers to that
1. they can, but they'd have to retrain the model every time it fucks up, like when it started giving out people recipes for IEDs
2. they can't, really, because it's a language model, not a fact model; it can still stumble into an untruth
3. if they can, then they can remove all the copyrighted material from their training base, and there goes their model
4. they shouldn't, because it wastes a fuckton of water

@mjgardner hence the 🤪

@alwayscurious @gabrielesvelto

I would agree that IPFS should only be used for these things. Unfortunately, it has already been used to distribute malware and CSAM material.

If I understand GDPR and other data regulations correctly, the right to delete personal data does not apply only to personal data that you personally store. As far as I know IPFS does not have a delete function and would prevent anyone or any organization from complying with a legitimate GDPR delete request.

I like IPFS technology, but I would not want to bear the legal or reputational risk associated with data regulation non-compliance.

I would like to be wrong about my interpretation. Open to any thoughts you might have.