Is there any reason to believe that deleting a ChatGPT conversation is anything more than "UPDATE conversations SET status='user_deleted WHERE conversation_id=..."?
Don’t get me wrong, I am highly skeptical. I also am genuinely curious because it seems to be in their best interest to delete these records for a few reasons:
1. Adherence to their own customer-facing policy.
2. Corporate or government customers would CERTAINLY want their data handling requirements to be respected.
3. In my experience at $MEGA_CORP, we absolutely delete customer data or never maintain logs at all for ML inference products.
4. They’re a corporation with explicit goal of making money. They’re not interested in assisting LE beyond minimum legal requirements.
> They’re a corporation with explicit goal of making money. They’re not interested in assisting LE beyond minimum legal requirements.
Having a good relation with LE and the state is beneficial to companies, it puts them in a good position to sell them services, get preferential treatment, quid pro quo, etc.
Look at how Google, Microsoft, Amazon etc cozied up to LE and the government. They get billion dollar contracts, partnerships with LE and the more they cooperate willingly, the less likely they'll be sued into cooperation or punished with loss of contracts.
How will you redeem your stable coin without some interaction with and approval from a bank? Where do you think the stable coin issuers hold their dollars?
I mean FFS the dang tokens are literally pegged to the dollar.
Even in ANY jurisdiction you’d presumably need a contractual agreement with the issuer. IIRC only certain entities may redeem tether/USDC for cash. You at a minimum need an account! Not like I can just send those companies my tokens and get straight cash.
The whole thing is just asinine. The killer use case for crypto is dodging laws & regulation. Not even judging because that’s REAL utility!
The vast majority of USDC(T) to cash transactions don’t happen through the redemption mechanism. The redemption mechanism is there for the purposes of holding the peg.
Yeah sure, if there is a single such party. I haven't looked at how stripe is implementing this, but since it's a blockchain total control is an option, not a requirement.
Arc always interested me for the UX and design choices (especially since I'm one of those who constantly has 100s of tabs open). But the account requirement is a hard blocker for me adopting as my daily driver. Anyone know of similar projects? I recall there being a arc-inspired linux-supported project, but they refused to sign their macOS release for god knows what reason.
I’m not arguing against compensation and other dissuasive/retributive punishment - I did call it a misdeed. Suitable compensation and punishment are absolutely appropriate.
But yes, I am arguing that four years of prison time (there’s also three years of supervised release - so seven years of court oversight total) is disproportionate punishment, and probably any prison time at all for this act. Prison makes the most sense for violent criminals.
I am fine with lots of other compensatory and punitive consequences, including the criminal conviction itself which should not be underestimated as a public record visible in background checks, at least some kinds of orders restricting future activities with computers and/or his former employer for a suitable duration, plus whatever monetary consequences are deemed appropriate.
How much money would someone need to cause in damages to you or your loved ones before you change your tune? Steal your car? Your home? Your parent’s retirement? It’s just money!
Yes. It’s just money, which is why I want non-imprisonment punishments for any of those scenarios, unless prison would usefully achieve some remedial goal like making your car theft example less likely to recur because the person is locked up.
There are lots of better ways to punish this kind of crime, generally. Imprisonment doesn’t get my money back, is expensive for the taxpayer, is at least as likely to make the criminal more prone to reoffend as less prone to that given how typical American prisons work, and isn’t necessary for either retributive or deterrent purposes.
Their criminal record, any court order to pay compensatory and punitive damages, any loss of their own property or bankruptcy that results, and so on would be plenty of retribution and deterrence.
Now, if they try to flee from justice or violate court orders or hide assets in ways that imprisonment would usefully interfere with, that’s a different question. Prison makes sense in many cases, but merely making the victims of a nonviolent monetary crime feel satisfied is not inherently such a case.
I’m sorry to hear your grandma got targeted by con artists, but it’s a rare scam where imprisoning the few individuals who are actually within reach of arrest and who generate enough usable evidence to convict them will meaningfully protect the scam’s potential future victims. In those rare cases, imprisonment might well be appropriate.
I don’t see signs of that in the case we are discussing. This crime was a crime of opportunity against a large corporation causing only monetary harm to the corporation in the form of inconvenience and time wasted for its employees to clean up the mess, but not ruining anyone or anything beyond coworkers’ account profile settings, not even anyone’s paychecks.
Certainly this case was worthy of punishment, definitely worthy of the felony criminal conviction and potential damages if the employer wants to sue or if this criminal statute lets the court include that in the sentence, likely worthy of temporarily or permanently keeping him away from employer computer systems beyond something heavily locked down (e.g. point of sale screen), and maybe also temporarily or permanently away from computers or the internet in general if that won’t unreasonably prevent him from having some viable way of making a living, but not worthy of imprisonment without more reason for that.
I haven't even really been discussing the case from the OP. I'm more so just surprised at the number of comments (like yourself) that appear to be expressing sympathy for financial or white collar criminals.
I suppose it's a philosophical difference...I just hope that you appreciate how extreme the position is. The amount of fraud in this country is disturbing and I don't think it is compassionate/kind at all to keep these people out of prison while most people are struggling to make an honest living. It creates a moral hazard.
I’m not expressing sympathy for financial or white-collar criminals. They deserve lots of scorn and punishment, including more criminal convictions, fines, restitution, court orders, and court oversight than they typically get. My position is not what you seem to think it is, which would indeed be an extreme position.
I just don’t equate punishment with prison. I realize that the best kind of punishment isn’t always having the taxpayers pay for years of that person’s food and lodging, depriving their innocent relatives and colleagues of the emotional/family presence and professional labor/earnings of someone who may have been very noncriminally important to them in many ways outside of prison, introducing them to the many gangs and violent criminals that populate US prisons while simultaneously subjecting them to a traumatic change in life circumstances, turning them into low-paid involuntary workers for wealthy capitalists to profit from as is done in many privately run prisons pursuant to the exception in the Thirteenth Amendment, and so on.
Nothing I said is true only for the financial or white-collar criminal. In particular, poor brown or Black drug users are way over-imprisoned and that shouldn’t happen either. I’d actually rather harsher punishments for the financial white-collar criminal than for the poor minority drug addicted, but in most cases neither should involve prison.
Prison is clearly necessary in some cases and arguably necessary in others, but it shouldn’t be our first thought of how to punish a criminal - whether white-collar or blue-collar - especially not the way typical US prisons work.
I don't buy this equivalence of financial damage to a person with financial damage to a business.
If I had a business its finances would be separate from my personal finance using limited liability, so even if someone destroyed 100% of its value, it would only be no return on investment for me - sad and bad but totally not equivalent to losing all my personal money.
And I don’t buy this as a serious well thought out argument. If someone destroys your method of producing personal income they have indeed damaged your personal finances.
> According to the OECD, 'household disposable income is income available to households such as wages and salaries, income from self-employment and unincorporated enterprises, income from pensions and other social benefits, and income from financial investments (less any payments of tax, social insurance contributions and interest on financial liabilities). 'Gross' means that depreciation costs are not subtracted.'[1] This indicator also takes account of social transfers in kind 'such as health or education provided for free or at reduced prices by governments and not-for-profit organisations.'
United States: 62,300
France: 45,548
Americans need to be more grateful for what they have.
Look, I am not saying life is inherently better in America vs France. This thread started as a debate about wages and social benefits. If you're truly interested in a good faith discussion on that topic, the metrics I'm highlighting are essential. If you've already cemented your opinion and just have a bone to pick with the United States there's probably not much common ground we can find.
> Disposable income is a poor metric to use though.
Hard Disagree. It's directly related to standard of living. You're also leaving out the other parts. It's adjusted for PPP, taxes, essential household costs (healthcare, shelter, etc), and social benefits.
> Money isn't everything. The french have better public transport, more social stability, a life expectancy that's higher by five (!) years etc etc.
Of course money isn't everything...but again we started off by talking about it.
> By pretty much whatever standard you use, their quality of life is much higher.
I think if you're a person that is primarily focused on economic indicators, I can see your point.
Because you mentioned it, I do think a lot of this comes down to cultural differences. To me (and to most Europeans!), the economic stuff just doesn't matter as much, so it's not a compelling argument to make.
I had excellent cheap pasta on a beautiful plaza in Italy yesterday, I got there via 30 euro Ryanair flight, and I booked it over my abundant PTO. At no point exploring Florence, a city of 400.000 people, did I feel unsafe at all.
That, to me, is the kind of stuff that really matters and the kind of stuff that I just can't have in the US.
It's also the kind of stuff that is hard to capture in economic stats, which is why I don't really pay as much attention to them.
I've lived in the US for almost a decade. I made a lot more money, but my life felt worse.
But maybe Americans really do just have different values and they'd rather have more money on their bank account.
I upvoted you because you argued your point well.
It's just that we're talking past each other, quality of life is so much more than that. It's the environment you live in. It's knowing that a random piece of bread you'll buy in a supermarket or in a train station will have a certain level of quality. It's cheese that doesn't taste like plastic. It's having time to spend with your loved ones. It's nobody having to worry about a medical emergency bankrupting them. It's higher education not being gated to the well-off.
>To me (and to most Europeans!), the economic stuff just doesn't matter as much
Then why did you move to make more money in the US? Why are many young Europeans moving to work abroad?
People who gaslight others for chasing money, are those who already have enough money and can't empathize with those wo do not.
>I had excellent cheap pasta on a beautiful plaza in Italy yesterday, I got there via 30 euro Ryanair flight
Cherry picking personal holiday travels isn't representative of anything in this topic. Also 30 Euro flights are not the norm everywhere. You need to live in the right country/city and get lucky.
It's just to illustrate a point regarding quality of life.
Experiences like these are just straight up impossible in the US. Believe me, I've tried. There's no nice Italian plazas anywhere and in most places in the country you wouldn't even wanna be sitting outside.
Is it possible for you drive over the border to Mexico and have best Mexican food costing almost nothing. Can you fly to Caribbean or Hawaii over the weekend? Can you camp in Grand Canyon, Yosemite or Yellowstone?
Your view is in no way representative of a typical European who cares a lot more about money then you. Money, which you ironically made in the states.
But Florence is a real city, where real people live. As is the city I live in and it, too, has plenty such spots.
There is very few places in the US where I would like to sit outside on a plaza and have my dinner - and that is indicative of social decay and a lack of focus on building pleasant public spaces.
A lot of people don't care about having Italian plazas on daily basis, like my German ex-boss who just moved to the US, and probably also Italians who move abroad for jobs. You keep harping on about one point that matters to you personally but even you don't live in Italy. Why is that?
Europe also doesn't have grand canyons. I don't need to see a grand canyon every month though.
>- and that is indicative of social decay and a lack of focus on building pleasant public spaces.
It's important to note as someone living in the US, most of our cost of living is completely invisible. We have thousands of "small" invisible taxes tacked on to everything we do.
Benefits are expensive, healthcare is expensive, transportation is expensive, food is expensive, and on and on. It's quite hard to just compare the US to France because of that. I think a lot of this "disposable income" relies on you being an able-bodied person of young age with zero health conditions and zero risk of emergencies. As soon as that's not the case, that "disposable" income vanishes.
From my anecdotal evidence (so it proves nothing), it seems like being poor / middle class in France is better than in the U.S. But being high-middle class / rich / in the owner class, is better in the U.S, since you already don't need the socialized healthcare, you actively seek segregated places to live, you do not take the public transport (or at least that often), etc, but you do get to enjoy all the amenities for rich people that the U.S offer, which is way more than France since it has a higher volume of rich people.
That is, if you don't mind higher crime numbers, literal shit on the streets, a traffic system that is fundamentally broken due to overreliance on cars, a persistent chance of getting shot, a lack of pleasant third spaces to hang out in and a general bad conscience due to the reality of living in a near-palace while your fellow citizens live in cardboard boxes on the street.
I've lived in the US for a while and while I'm not incredibly wealthy, my net worth is easily in the seven figures. I ended up moving away for the above reasons.
