Google and Privacy can't exist in the same sentence.
this post was submitted on 16 Sep 2025
15 points (80.0% liked)
Technology
40299 readers
237 users here now
A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.
Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.
Subcommunities on Beehaw:
This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
'Press x to doubt'
Google and privacy in the same sentence... Lol
Privacy preserving? More like avoiding lawsuits due to copyrighted information
This! Plus opening up the possibility for Google to use private user data with even less concern. So not a privacy win at all.
LLMs have non-deterministic outputs, meaning you can't exactly predict what they'll say.
I mean...they can have non-deterministic outputs. There's no requirement for that to be the case.
It might be desirable in some situations; randomness can be a tactic to help provide variety in a conversation. But it might be very undesirable in others: no matter how many times I ask "What is 1+1?", I usually want the same answer.
In theory, it's just an algorithm that will always produce the same output given the exact same inputs. In practice it's nearly impossible to have fully deterministic outputs because of the limited precision and repeatability we get with floating point numbers on GPUs.
What does people use a 1b model for?