docs(LLM provider): Add usage tracking Note to OpenHands provider page #92
Conversation
Add a Note after the API key instructions and before the models table to clarify minimal usage tracking sent to All Hands AI and that we never sell data. Co-authored-by: openhands <openhands@all-hands.dev>
|
|
||
| <Note> | ||
| When you use OpenHands as provider, OpenHands tracks the usage of the models to understand whether they are used for the agent, or for the condenser, or for other uses. This tracking is minimal, and will be sent to All Hands AI to help us improve the experience with OpenHands. We never sell this data. | ||
| </Note> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Maybe shorter and simpler? Let's move this down to the "CLI" section since this really just applies to CLI (since it sends over the metadata)
| </Note> | |
| <Note> | |
| When you use OpenHands as an LLM provider, OpenHands may track model usage to better understand how you use them and help us improve the experience. | |
| </Note> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
On it. I feel we should still say clearly it sends it to AH...? Why not, since it... does?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actually could we say, "in accordance to our privacy policy"?
https://openhands.dev/privacy
I'm a little worried about this getting out of sync with the actual privacy policy, which in the worst case could expose us to legal liability.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
On it. TBH I don’t think there’s much real legal risk here, although I guess yes they should be in sync.
I do think this issue is incredibly important from the perspective of user expectations and project reputation. I’ll follow up elsewhere on that…
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Xingyao, could we go with this? It's minimal, but that's also a good thing, I'm thinking that best is either in plain English or minimal for people to be informed 🤔
I'm considering to follow up with link to the source code (maybe a small refactoring there, so that this code is all in one place we can point to, not sure)
Then users can see exactly what's up, hey it's Open Source! So they don't have to guess
…ion; clarify metadata is sent to All Hands AI\n\nPer reviewer feedback, relocate the Note from after API key to the CLI section and simplify wording while retaining that minimal metadata is sent to All Hands AI to improve the experience.\n\nCo-authored-by: openhands <openhands@all-hands.dev>
…; explicitly mention metadata is sent to All Hands AI\n\nCo-authored-by: openhands <openhands@all-hands.dev>
neubig
left a comment
neubig
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
In a previous comment I requested that this include a link to our privacy policy, instead of posting specifically about what it is or is not used for, since that may get out of sync. I think we should do that before changing the wording here: https://openhands.dev/privacy
…eedback\n\nReplace explicit data-use statement with a link to https://openhands.dev/privacy to avoid drift.\n\nCo-authored-by: openhands <openhands@all-hands.dev>
Done! WDYT, does this work? |
FWIW I do see the concern that it’d get out of sync. But I’m not sure it’s the best way to express it to people. The attempt in this PR is to say in plain English what happens, so that people know and it doesn’t come as a surprise. Maybe we should add what data is collected here, because if people don’t know it’s just ‘agent’ or ‘condenser’, and they find out later that OpenHands tracks their usage, they may fear the worst. FWIW, I’ve seen at times something like, on some company site: “Tos in English” << with a plain English short explanation of what’s up, and then a link to the full legalese. I’m not good with words, to convey it, if you could imagine the Tos in English, it was fun, it had a lightweight tone and told people what’s happening and why. Maybe it’s worth thinking of this PR as the small version of that? (It’s not like AH is going to sell this kind of data, right? So couldn’t we just say it doesn’t?) |
neubig
left a comment
neubig
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
LGTM now! And yes, I think it makes a lot of sense for us to try to create a simpler version of the privacy policy as well.
This PR adds a Note to the OpenHands LLM provider documentation clarifying minimal usage tracking:
File changed:
Let me know if you'd like the Note positioned elsewhere or reworded.
@enyst can click here to continue refining the PR