Source: https://front-end.social/@fox/110846484782705013

Text in the screenshot from Grammarly says:

We develop data sets to train our algorithms so that we can improve the services we provide to customers like you. We have devoted significant time and resources to developing methods to ensure that these data sets are anonymized and de-identified.

To develop these data sets, we sample snippets of text at random, disassociate them from a user’s account, and then use a variety of different methods to strip the text of identifying information (such as identifiers, contact details, addresses, etc.). Only then do we use the snippets to train our algorithms-and the original text is deleted. In other words, we don’t store any text in a manner that can be associated with your account or used to identify you or anyone else.

We currently offer a feature that permits customers to opt out of this use for Grammarly Business teams of 500 users or more. Please let me know if you might be interested in a license of this size, and I’II forward your request to the corresponding team.

    • fcSolar@lemmy.worldEnglish
      173·
      1 year ago

      Per their website premium includes “Unlimited sentence paraphrasing powered by A.I.” so I’m not sure they’re an appropriate alternative to avoid the “AI” bullshit.

      • Diabolo96@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        298·
        1 year ago

        You can’t avoid the AI “bullshit”. It’s like saying you want to avoid this portable phone craze. It’s a tool.

        • fcSolar@lemmy.worldEnglish
          147·
          1 year ago

          I can avoid it like I’ve avoided cryptocurrency and NFTs. And it may be a “tool,” but it’s one built on the theft from and unpaid labor of tens of thousands of independent creators, and is nigh wholly controlled by corporate interests bent on eliminating those same independent creators whose data they stole to make their “tools.” It should not exist. Not until it can be made in an ethical manner without harming the creatives necessary to make it.

          • arglebargle@lemm.eeEnglish
            116·
            1 year ago

            I don’t buy the theft argument. Was reading books to my daughter to help them learn how to read theft? When we were working on parameters in the 60s to help a computer identify a balloon vs. a dog, was that theft? The corpulent (edit: LOL I guess that word works here in the “we have abundunce” sort of way, but I meant copyleft) side of me says if you put something out in public spaces, people are going to learn from it. If you don’t want that, don’t share it.

            But even beyond that, parameters of learning are not copying, they are examples to develop data points on. Or in the case of imagery and something like stable diffusion it is math formulas developed in the 40s on how to make noise and then reverse that. Is that copying or theft?

            I am willing to have the argument that AI is full of pitfalls. And that corporate control is not a good thing. I am struggling to see this theft.

            • bloodfart@lemmy.ml
              9·
              1 year ago

              It isn’t theft because the technology fundamentally steals. It’s theft because the people in control of the technology fundamentally steal.

              I’m not talking about basement dwellers with a 3090 either. People using their m2 to generate lactating joe Biden fanfic aren’t the problem like multi-billion dollar companies taking advantage of the webs openness to train models that will be used to sell generative services replacing the creators of the stuff they were trained on are.

              It’s the enclosures all over again.

              Now when people speak out about it they’re called luddites and we don’t have the historical literacy to say “yes, I will smash this and any mill used to oppress me”.

              • arglebargle@lemm.eeEnglish
                23·
                1 year ago

                I still do not see that as theft. Or at least no different than theft of labor like a company store.

                Corporate dominance, commercialization, exploitation, something along those lines. But that is the same as everything else, AI is not specifically the issue.

                Then again I was listening to Knowledge Fight and frankly the fact that people will believe DNA has antennas, or that a team of people on Real World cannot solve “what is 27 divided by 3” does not leave me much hope for us anyways. They tried and ran out of time saying it was unsolvable. Maybe we get what we deserve.

                • bloodfart@lemmy.ml
                  62·
                  1 year ago

                  people struggling for a way to express how massive incredibly powerful companies are literally building technology that will take their livelihoods away aren’t gonna develop a vocabulary for the exact thing that’s happening.

                  they’re stealing. it’s theft.

                  it doesn’t matter that the precise thing happening isn’t what we would legally call theft. the people saying ai is theft believe that their only chance to keep the corporate users of the technology from destroying their future and leaving them with nothing is to mobilize now using language that everyone understands. so they’re calling it theft.

                  those people are wrong btw, they can’t win even a tiny victory against the entire economic system that’s decided the way itll extract profit from the tech sector is by automating labor.

                  thats the difference between which side of the spear youre on.

                  if you got the point youre yelling “ahh, dont, youre literally killing me! please, if you have any humanity in you save me from this monster!” if you have the stick end youre yelling “oh fuck off, the severe hemorrhage is killing you, stop lying! check out what happens when i twist this sucker!” when youre on the sidelines youre just eating popcorn and arguing about minutiae like us.

                  to your last point, i’d be more worried about historical literacy. a calculator can act as a bandage for lack of numeracy, no machine will bridge the gap in understanding that pedantry mobilized against justice sails through.

                  • arglebargle@lemm.eeEnglish
                    15·
                    1 year ago

                    So you are saying automobiles stole the whip makers jobs. Or movable type stole the scribes job. Or the Word processor stole the secretary’s job. I simply do not buy the argument that changing technology is theft, it just is what it is.

                    Its like you are conflating two arguments.

                    I fail to see the theft. I only see change. Livelihoods have changed since forever. What we do from here is a problem, but it is not theft any more than everything else. I mean unless you want to go back to the source of all the problems: agriculture which kicked off the whole damn mess in the first place.

          • Diabolo96@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            317·
            1 year ago

            The whole system is built on exploitation. I don’t see you boycotting luxury clothes, diamond, rare metal that are made by exploiting someone from a third world country to inhuman levels. Ah, yes. It could affect people you know, It’s immoral now. Am tired of this hypocrisy.

      • Laticauda@lemmy.ca
        5·
        1 year ago

        I’m pretty sure most tools like this have to use ai to some degree to be more effective than something like Microsoft Word. I think the issue is more whether it’s opt in or not to include your own data.

    • slacktoid@lemmy.mlEnglish
      91·
      1 year ago

      Can confirm good drop in replacement. Also self hostable (to a point )

    • relyn@lemmy.ml
      4·
      1 year ago

      I took a quick look at this and it seems that the server portion of this product is open source but the apps such as extensions are not. I’m not saying it’s bad or even that it’s a red flag. I just felt like I should point it out.

    • Frog-Brawler@kbin.social
      322·
      1 year ago

      I appreciate you spreading open source alternatives, but this is one of those things that needs an HR solution; not IT.