[sebzim4500]

>It casts shade against OpenAI, claiming – contra OpenAI's own assurances about retention – that "ChatGPT may store data related to your queries and responses". But, it only offers the same non-verifiable assurances itself – with even less reputation, or opportunity to hold accountable for violations, than with OpenAI.

I think you are confusing the terms of ChatGPT and the OpenAI API. OpenAI are uncharacteristically open about the fact that they are retaining and training on data collected through ChatGPT.

>We do not use Content that you provide to or receive from our API (“API Content”) to develop or improve our Services. We may use Content from Services other than our API (“Non-API Content”) to help develop and improve our Services.

[gojomo]

That's an interesting angle, and barring explicit clarification from OpenAI, it'd be possible to see 'ChatGPT' either as an 'OpenAI API' (in a very general sense), or as not the same thing they mean by 'OpenAI API'.

However, I do see a help page (https://help.openai.com/en/articles/5722486-how-your-data-is...) that specifically identifies ChatGPT & DALL-E as examples of "non-API consumer services", confirming your interpretation.

(It's nice that they let even users of those services opt-out of such reuse – if you trust their processes & assurances.)

As OpenAI also offers a 'ChatGPT API', separate in entry-point & billing from the consumer-facing subscription (or free offering), it's a bit unclear what retention/retraining rules they intend to apply to that. And, unclear whether this 'Incognito ChatGPT' is actually backed by the "non-API consumer service" web-brwoser interface, or the 'ChatGPT API'.