Hmm, it's not that simple, is it? Let's say the AI is trained on the tweet "Ben Adams drove to Mexico yesterday but I still haven't heard from him."

From this knowledge, you can ask the AI "Who has driven to Mexico" and it might know that Ben Adams did, and reply with that.

HOWEVER it's also baked into the model and can't be surgically removed after a complaint. That's the irreversibility part. You can't undo isolated training. You need to provide it a new data set and train it all over again. They won't do that because it's too costly.

The problem with the above example is of course that it can also contain sensitive or private user details.

I've easily extracted the complete song lyrics to the letter from GPT-4 even if OpenAI try to put up guardrails against it due to the copyright issues. AI is really still in the wild west phase...

The irreversibility is still important to highlight, as it is distinctively different from a similar consent issue with search: "Google indexed my website against my will, but I will just forbid them to include me in search results going forward".

It is irreversible similar to how a student reading a textbook from LibGen can remember and profit from that information forever. Kinda crazy how many in this community went from champions of freedom of knowledge to champions of megacorps owning and controlling of all of human creation in the span of like two years when it became clear other corporations could profit off that freedom too.