X to allow third parties to train their AI models with social media users' data Elon Musk's social media mouthpiece X (formerly known as Twitter) has updated its Terms of Service and Privacy Policy to direct disputes to a federal court in Texas and allow third parties to train AIs on user posts. The updates will allow "third-party collaborators" access to user data, although it appears there will be some …
"If they thought various AIs were racist before, they've seen nothing yet!"
I really hope any LLM that has ever set foot on X will be tagged appropriately !
Imagine one that responds in a normal way and then, upon being triggered by one special term (Trump ? Muskie ? WW2 ?), goes full X nonsense mode !
This post has been deleted by its author
This post has been deleted by its author
This post has been deleted by its author
This post has been deleted by its author
"The updates will allow "third-party collaborators" access to user data"
Hmm, what data? If it's just xeets, I don't see a problem - if you post stuff on social media, you're pretty much giving it away, although I dread to think what an AI trained on that festering heap of mindless BullXhit (thank you Fonant, I like that!) would be like.
But is it just xeets? "User data" could mean anything, and without some clarification Xitter users might be justified in being a little concerned - particularly those who have foolishly provided genuine names etc.
"But is it just xeets? "User data" could mean anything, and without some clarification Xitter users might be justified in being a little concerned - particularly those who have foolishly provided genuine names etc."
Let's hope whatever they do, it's GDPR compliant! Being Opt-Out and coming in so soon, I can see very large GDPR fines if there's any chance of PII leaking through this, possibly even just making it Opt-Out might be enough to incur fines.
The problem with that being that with the idiots on there who thought (and still think) the 2020 election was stolen, Covid is a hoax, and everyone except Trump is corrupt or a criminal, you'll have AI being trained in a 3rd party where there isn't any "PC reader context" because the NPCs of the denier party will have their stuff unchecked. That's then resulting in AI that gets sold off to other entities that may never be fact-checked, because Musskie doesn't give a damn as long as he gets paid.
He'll tell his team to just ignore the setting and sell all the data. If it gets out that that happened, he'll claim it was a bug and go into his persecution mode if anyone dares question his word.
Heck, I could see him charging a premium for the data of users who have "opted out" as the consumers of such data would probably pay me to get at the stuff from unwilling participants they can't collect data from on other platforms that will obey user settings.
Elon may be setting himself up for more costs as it should be easy to make claims of improper venue against X. If a case is file in Northern Texas, fees have to be paid, attorney billable hours, etc. I expect a motion to move venues would be granted regardless of the T&C's since if neither side has a 'presence' in that district, the court may declare it burdensome on one side of the other. For many torts in the US, the plaintiff is required to file in the defendant's district. If I booked a shared office space in Alaska and had in my T&C's/contracts that all suits will be heard in an Alaskan court, I would be putting an unfair burden on defendants. Most people in the US don't realize just how far from the "lower 48" Alaska is. Miami to Anchorage is a 10 hour flight, weather permitting. One could drive the 5,000 miles. I use this as an example as it was brought up in a book I really like in reverse. You make your business address officially in Alaska and if anybody wants to sue, they have to file there which might be too costly for them to bother. It's a way to cut down on nuisance suits.
North Texas, while not particularly near anything, isn't way out of line the way Anchorage would be though. There have been enough court cases there to establish that there's a judge in that district (the only one hearing cases) who doesn't feel bound by precedent when it crosses his conservative views so yeah it's very possible to have a suit there which doesn't get moved to another venue.
"who doesn't feel bound by precedent when it crosses his conservative views so yeah it's very possible to have a suit there which doesn't get moved to another venue."
It's not a matter of precedent, it's a matter of proper venue. If neither party has a presence in that court's jurisdiction, the case has to be moved to a relevant court that does. Exceptions are made when cases are moved due to publicity where it can be argued that there can be bias against one of the parties. That usually applies to cases where there will be a jury trail and mainly for criminal cases rather than civil. Judges have a lot of latitude that's balanced by the possibility of being reversed by a higher court or having cases sent back down which looks really bad.
It's not hard to look up how jurisdiction works in the US.
It can happen - but if the judge is in favour it's not guaranteed to do so quickly. e.g. here's a story about a judge in West Texas where the judge is having the consequences you describe happen, but it has taken years and it's not over yet: https://www.courthousenews.com/the-rise-and-fall-of-a-texas-patent-court/ Relevant to your exact concerns, “These cases are great examples of why patentees, particularly [non-practicing entities], really like Judge Albright,” Gugliuzza wrote. “He bends over backwards to avoid dismissing for improper venue.”
Sure, there are checks and balances - eventually. I think you're confusing how it should work with how it can in practice.
"I think you're confusing how it should work with how it can in practice."
Another component of venue has to do with subject matter. Patent, Trademark and Copyright litigation is heard in specific Federal courts so their districts tend to be quite large and the borders can be a bit fuzzy to deal with schedules. What you won't find is cases where the litigants are on one coast and the plaintiff has gone judge shopping and filed on the opposite side of the country.
Moving a case to a new court is expensive. Elon can try to go shopping for judges, but if cases do get moved somewhere more appropriate, it will be very expensive.
Good luck to them... Virtually every change alienates more people who were there in the early Twitter days.
All the sensible people are moving to Twitter 2.0 (aka Blue Sky), because it's truly the closest to what Twitter was in its early days. It's also fediversed, so it technically could interact with the likes of Mastodon or Threads. But... why would you want to?
exacly and that goes for ALL socials.
It was a fun ride. I used Twitter a lot fro business in 2010-2017. Then we moved to Instagram before Musk came as it was getting ridiculous. We had a series of accounts that were more popular than the official ones. We dominated that area for years and was even used by the players and groundstaff. But the offical site didnt like that so they banned 1 of the accounts for 'harrassing content' on a sports feed! LOL. All opur journos were seasoned and knew how to write to avoid the wrath of Twitter so it wasn't that.
On The same day, we closed our 6 other accounts on Twitter and this was before Musk. Oddly enough, X has unbanned the handle now, but it is too late. We are never going back to social ever. It is from there that this simping woke BS came from. Twitter were the vanguard of the absurd and would happily let a BAMER person write something like this: "Why do white people do X, it is so sad". Report it and you get banned. Reply in kind and you get banned.
So we moved to Instagram which in 2019/20 was the best social. But we pulled out completely from all social when we looked at the traffic stats and the amount of work relative to each media form. In brief, about 80% of our time was spent managing socials with less than 5% of revenue. Which means we were spending most of our time working for Instagram for free. (which we knew but it was a necessary evil),
The age of Social in any form is well past. Even those saddo alternatives are but shadows of Socials in the full pomp and glory where we allowed ourselves to believe that the banal and unintelligent did deserve some merit after all - despite 1000s of years evidence to the contrary.
Musk knows he has jumped on a bandwagon that is heading over the cliff. Musk used to at least have a talent for emerging tech - u cannot deny it even if u are jealous of him. Twitter was his nemesis. And he is really trying to fix what cannot be fixed. Its time has passed and he knows that.
This post has been deleted by its author
Right on! He should be named Exlax (rather than Elon) for his dedication to facilitating BS transit, with no holes barred, no hatches battened down, and none of the regularity provided by moral fibers, and for decomplexed deconstipation of the most turpid of bowels, spewing jets of toxic utterances, far and wide, across the naive social media landscapes.
It'll take a heck of a lot of charmin' to clean up his mess, commensurate to a recurring cataclismic gastrointestinal deflagration! (IMHO)
It's very short lengths of (at best) inaccurate, increasingly batshit crazy text with poor spelling and terrible grammar.
It's far worse than Reddit, and that's already well known to have poisoned several LLMs.
Nobody who wanted to actually make money from their LLM would touch that dataset with someone else's bargepole.
This post has been deleted by its author
He is just experimenting with the potential, if it fails, no skin off his back. He mostly expects it to.
If he can use it for his ai training, he can give it to others tho. He's getting filthy rich being a data warehouser of YOU. Other AI's, probably other countries, will come a knocking, pretty sure this all sounds like a likely foreign plot to begin with.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2025
