Linkedin Will Soon Train AI Models with Data From European Users
Key topics
LinkedIn plans to train AI models using European users' data with an opt-out option, sparking concerns about data privacy and the quality of AI training data. The discussion highlights worries about 'legitimate interest' as a legal basis and the potential consequences of training AI on low-quality, AI-generated content.
Snapshot generated from the HN discussion
Discussion Activity
Very active discussionFirst comment
46m
Peak period
45
1-2h
Avg / period
8.3
Based on 83 loaded comments
Key moments
- 01Story posted
Sep 22, 2025 at 5:33 AM EDT
3 months ago
Step 01 - 02First comment
Sep 22, 2025 at 6:20 AM EDT
46m after posting
Step 02 - 03Peak activity
45 comments in 1-2h
Hottest window of the conversation
Step 03 - 04Latest activity
Sep 22, 2025 at 6:35 PM EDT
3 months ago
Step 04
Generating AI Summary...
Analyzing up to 500 comments to identify key contributors and discussion patterns
Want the full context?
Jump to the original sources
Read the primary article or dive into the live Hacker News thread when you're ready.
The extra money would be very useful to me right now, but I'm surviving without it and the three-day weekend is really working for me. I'm even finding time to relearn a second language on case the UK follows the US too far down the full-fash route and I feel the need to get out of dodge [I refuse to be the sort of Brit who rocks up everywhere expecting everyone to speak English!].
Here's just a quick reminder that if you're a LinkedIn user based in an EU member state, and if you do not believe that “legitimate interest” applies, you can file a complaint with your national supervisory authority (SA)/data protection authority (DPA); see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_data_protection_autho...
From my reading of the article, this is Linkedin (an American company) that has decided to collect data about Europeans - the EU is not involved. Linkedin has decided that making it opt-out is covered by "legitimate interests". So I guess the real issue here is that the rest of you just don't get the option - you are included anyway.
Strangely enough, it wasn't a problem at all. They'd still call me, interview me and make an offer. So I believe people overestimate the importance of LI, at least for some cases.
This is an important issue from me because it's the only so-called "social" site that seems somewhat enforced by the system we're living in, so it has been abused in various ways as people believe they have no choice but to share the details related to their education, past and present employment with the general public.
0. now my current job!
I held out on facebook since last year, but have given in. My wife is my only friend, even if facebook is pushing a never ending desperate barrage of youmightknow mails.
"Legitimate interest" is a very specific term in context of GDPR. Not a lawyer, but have been looking into it previously, and I doubt "we want to feed data to our AI so we can make more money" passes the Legitimate Interest Assesment (LIA) test.
Here's an example of a test that must pass (sorry, docx, but way better than a random explainer): https://ico.org.uk/media2/for-organisations/forms/2258435/gd...
Legitimate interest does NOT require consent, is murky, and thus often gets used to justify things that should not exist under GDPR but the most likely consequence is that the company gets to do it for 3+ years before being told "no, you can't do that anymore"...
That content could contain personal data (such as when including it in your post), but that's an exception rather than a norm. And if we'd be following exceptions, even crawling websites could be illegal under the GDPR.
The resulting models might be a terrible hybrid distillation of GPT5 and Claude with a strong preference for hustle culture & banal parables.
"Should you choose to inscribe the lexical designation 'DOMINATE' within the commentary section, I shall subsequently furnish you with my proprietary methodology for accumulating substantial financial wealth in the millions."
"Comment the word DOMINATE and I'll share my secret method for making millions of dollars."
"yo if u type DOMINATE in comments ill tell u how 2 get mad rich like millions n stuff fr fr no cap"
Let it burn.
“Legitimate interest” is being used here to skirt around the need for consent (I.e. explicit opt-in) specifically because they know users will not give consent (otherwise they could easily ask them). That is an immediate red flag when it comes to “balancing” the rights and needs of the user vs the data processors “legitimate interest”.
i.e. big fine incoming for LinkedIn.
Its a really stupid time to test the EU over something that cant have much net value to LinkedIn - a 1bn EUR fine (approx 4% of LinkedIns revenue) is well within the current internal "cap" the EU have reached with issuance of fines.
But who knows. The EU is much more patient than I, and prefers boiling frogs to scalding them.
Even if it was free I wouldn't include it in AI training.
I don't know if it's AI slop or people genuinely baring their souls and revealing corpo-BS pseudo-deep thoughts, with a drop of grifters pushing their BS "Uber but for nailcare on Blockchain" whitepapers, either way I don't see any value you could extract from it.
Short of 4chan it's hard to think of a worse dataset. Do you really want a model trained on corporate thought leader gibberish?
Only the people with the right grindset that do a 4am ice face bath will survive.
Why take the legal risk?
Stop AI-ifying your platforms