DuckDuckAssitant is back! : privacy

[–] barbara@lemmy.ml 64 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Beware that it just forwards your queries to openai

We have agreements with model providers to further protect your privacy.

As noted above, we call model providers on your behalf so your personal information (for example, IP address) is not exposed to them. In addition, we have agreements in place with all model providers that further limit how they can use data from these anonymous requests that includes not using Prompts and Outputs to develop or improve their models as well as deleting all information received within 30 days.

[–] EveryMuffinIsNowEncrypted@lemmy.blahaj.zone 40 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

FYI: You don't have to choose OpenAI. You can also choose Claude 2.1. Its corpus is more ethically sourced & it's more private with user data, but in return it is naturally less feature-complete. Still pretty awesome though!

[+] LWD@lemm.ee 9 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (3 children)

[deleted]

[–] rollingflower@lemmy.kde.social 19 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Turbo misinformation

[–] venoft@lemmy.world 10 points 1 year ago

That's super wrong. Typical ai hallucination since it's not in training data (Claude is quite new).

[–] EveryMuffinIsNowEncrypted@lemmy.blahaj.zone 10 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

ChatGPT is incorrect. I asked Claude about it and this is what it has to say.

(Skip to bottom for tl;dr.)

tl;dr

Claude's end response:

when I said earlier that "Claude acts as a privacy layer provided by DuckDuckGo", that was an incorrect statement. To clarify:

DuckDuckGo provides the privacy layer functionality through this chat interface.

I am Claude, an AI model created by Anthropic to converse.

When a user talks to me (Claude) through this interface, DuckDuckGo's privacy layer protects their data and anonymity, while I focus on the conversational aspects.

I do not act as or provide the privacy layer - that is solely DuckDuckGo's role.

Thank you for catching my mistaken statement earlier. To summarize correctly:

DuckDuckGo enables the privacy layer protections. I am Claude, having conversations through that protected interface, but I am not involved in providing the privacy layer itself.

I appreciate you taking the time to ensure I understand this properly. Please let me know if any part of the explanation remains unclear!

[–] wuphysics87@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

That thing needs to summerize it's own shit.

[–] EveryMuffinIsNowEncrypted@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 1 year ago

I fucking AGREE.

[–] apotheotic@beehaw.org 19 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Um, how about no? Love DDG but good lord are we just supposed to take openai's word for this privacy? Lol

[–] ReversalHatchery@beehaw.org 3 points 1 year ago

Yes, it's a stretch, but think about it. If they is a proxy, then it isn't worse than using piped or invidious too search and listen for music or such.

[–] CapitanStrider@lemmy.dbzer0.com 18 points 1 year ago

No thanks

[–] rollingflower@lemmy.kde.social 11 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Damn they have ClaudeAI! Its way better than GPT

[–] madd0ck@feddit.de 11 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Unfortunately, they are using the old Claude 1.2 instant model instead of the newer Claude 3 Haiku

[–] rollingflower@lemmy.kde.social 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I also couldnt find their website at all, how do you access that chat?

Edit: tab on the search results page

[–] possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip 11 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Ok I guess

[+] Ilandar@aussie.zone 9 points 1 year ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

[deleted]

[–] z3rOR0ne@lemmy.ml 8 points 1 year ago

Meh. I'll stick with local llama and firejailed lmstudio.

[–] oldfart@lemm.ee 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

What is the link? It doesn't appear on main ddg page for me

[–] rollingflower@lemmy.kde.social 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

https://duckduckgo.com/?q=nothing&t=fpas&ia=chat#

[–] oldfart@lemm.ee 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Thank you! I've used anonchatgpt before but this is better, no captcha and two models to choose from

[–] rollingflower@lemmy.kde.social 1 points 1 year ago

Its strange that you need to search something first to access it. And the Claude model is really outdated. The new claude model is better than ChatGPT4 but the old one isnt.

[–] kandoh@reddthat.com 5 points 1 year ago

It's funny how fads have moved on from fashion and toys and onto the internet

[–] Gargari@lemmy.ml 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

They really think their target audience will like it?

[–] ReversalHatchery@beehaw.org 3 points 1 year ago

Well, I mostly haven't used the existing tools because I did not trust the service providers with my privacy, and also I do not think these are such an all important tools.

However this is a proxy, basically. Isn't it?
So if we are fine using youtube through (video proxying instances of) Invidious and Piped, then this should be fine too (if you don't input private info of yours or others, that is)

[+] Freuks@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

[deleted]

[–] JackGreenEarth@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I'll just use Jan locally on my machine and Microsoft Copilot for images.

[–] UntitledQuitting@reddthat.com 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Which models do you run on jan? I often get very weird responses and/or never ending feedback loops.

That being said I still don’t have much use for text-based ai, it doesn’t really fill any gaps in my workflow

[–] JackGreenEarth@lemm.ee 2 points 1 year ago

Stealth 7B mostly

[+] ChallengeApathy@infosec.pub -9 points 1 year ago (5 children)

I'm happy to stick with Brave. Far superior to DDG in literally every way.

[–] off_brand_@beehaw.org 10 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Isn't brave owned by that weird crypto guy? And based on chrome?

[–] ChallengeApathy@infosec.pub 1 points 1 year ago

Yeah, and? It's one of the best options for privacy. I'm referring to their search engine though.

[–] Scary_le_Poo@beehaw.org 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The irony of posting from infosec about how superior Brave is. Bruh moment.

[–] ChallengeApathy@infosec.pub 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I'm sorry that not everyone from my instance believes that Firefox is the only option 🙄

[–] Scary_le_Poo@beehaw.org 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Dude, there is degoogled chromium, and various other blink engine choices, but touting brave as a "superior" option? Oof. Big oof.

On the gecko side of things, there are a ton of great choices as well. All of them are better in every single way than brave.

[–] ChallengeApathy@infosec.pub 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Because it objectively IS. It passes privacy tests in so many areas where others fail and I'm not just talking about those privacy test sites, I'm talking tests we can run ourselves. It's fine if you don't like Brave but don't let your emotions get in the way of the fact that it is, by default, the best option for privacy out of the box. Sure, you CAN harden Firefox or use Librewolf but even those don't always succeed in passing those tests like Brave does.

[–] Scary_le_Poo@beehaw.org 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Bro. Be better.

"Objectively"

"Superior"

Your use of these words make me think that you don't understand what they mean. Go ahead, use brave all you want. Big oof.

[–] ChallengeApathy@infosec.pub 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It IS. It's a fact. You can run the tests yourself.

[–] Scary_le_Poo@beehaw.org 0 points 1 year ago

Smh.

[–] Firipu@startrek.website 4 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Why would I use brave (with its weird fucked up crypto links) over Vivaldi? If you're using chromium anyway, I don't get the brave love.

[–] ChallengeApathy@infosec.pub 1 points 1 year ago

Better privacy, better UI not cluttered by excessive and unnecessary options, and a fantastic feature set... but I'm referring to their search engine in this context.

[–] ReversalHatchery@beehaw.org 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

What has brave to do with this?

[–] ChallengeApathy@infosec.pub 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

They have a search engine...

[–] ReversalHatchery@beehaw.org 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

As I understand the point was the AI tool of the org, not the search engine.

[–] ChallengeApathy@infosec.pub 1 points 1 year ago

The AI is intrinsically linked to the search engine if I'm not mistaken. Brave has AI built into their search engine and their browser, but it's very well done and pro-privacy.

Privacy

A place to discuss privacy and freedom in the digital world.

Some Rules

Related communities

tl;dr