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)
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.
I would use Firefox over either, but at least Vivaldi’s ownership model seems pretty good (employee owned). Brave is just so untrustworthy at a company level.
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.
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.
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.
Better alternatives are always welcomed, even if they’re not universally needed or perfect. I already use their search engine quite regularly so I can imagine I will try this occasionally, though I think trust issues with AI chat will always be difficult to overcome for me since I’ve spent the majority of my life doing this stuff for myself.
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 And the Claude model is really outdated.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.
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!
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!
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.
Important question: exactly what does it forward to them? After reviewing their privacy policy, it looks like they may be forwarding something in addition to the query itself.
When it comes to adding a layer of privacy between your queries and the OpenAI results, I believe them, but I really want to know exactly how much privacy there is and isn’t.
Add comment