Live data from Hacker News

Not OK, Google

techcrunch.com

461–470 of 594 posts

Re: Not OK, Google

#461
Anyone with a passing acquintance of history and the insideousness of surveillance and will not be blase about privacy or casually trade it in for trivial conveniences that hardly merit the word ai.

You many not 'personally' need privacy or freedom at this point in your life but to casually dismiss it out of hand and fail to consider its import for a functioning democractic society is beyond reckless. Its just one of those things you don't need until till you do.

And thankfully individuals aren't in a position to trade that away unless they can write a new constitution and convince everyone to get on board.

All surveillance does is compromise your society in a fundamental way, and in this case just to add to Google bottom line and ramp up Google's creepiness factor even more. That's a bad deal.

Re: Not OK, Google

#462
post #109

When IR remotes hit college campuses, the game was to shut off someone else's TV through an open door. There's even a one button remote from that era that shuts off any TV in sight [0]. Voice control is like IR on steroids. Guest at house party: "Ok google, show naked pictures of [host's ex-girlfriend]" [0] https://www.tvbgone.com

It happens. I've been rickrolled by an acquaintance yelling "Alexa play never gonna give you up by rick astley" thru a screen window. Its gonna be a widespread cultural thing once Hollywood inevitably uses it in a movie or TV show as a joke. I don't watch that stuff, maybe that's where he got the idea it would be "funny" to team up with Alexa to rickroll me.

I find privacy anxiety to be much like electric car range anxiety. Once you have the product its not an issue, it drops to zero, but debate on the internet is extremely hot and heavy right before widespread adoption kicks off. Enormous amounts of toxic anxiety and paranoia bleeding out all over stuff that in practice after deployment just doesn't matter. In other online venues I've been worried about causing heart attacks by suggesting my next car will be electric, and this topic is about the same here.

Re: Not OK, Google

#463
post #359
post #345

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you normally use your friends' wifi? I do that when it's family, but generally not with my friends (don't do LAN parties anymore). With LTE, I don't need wifi.

Wasn't there a story recently about android phones still being tracked and tracking wifi hotspots even with wifi turned off? I believe location services still works pretty well even with GPS and wifi off. I would imagine if you walk into a home with google's AI doodads all over the place, you're gonna be picked up.

Makes you wonder how reliable airplane mode is.

Re: Not OK, Google

#464
post #300

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, but this is all we know about now, every day there is a new revelation about what the government has access too that we previously thought they didn't. I think it's naive to assume they don't have access to all of it.

Your claim is that the government have unfettered access to ALL the data. Can you provide a link to your claim or it is just your opinion because there is no proof of that?

Evidence has been slowly being released for years, what more do you need. Here is my third example for you [1], after this Im done.

[1] http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/special/politics/prism-...

Re: Not OK, Google

#465
post #426

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's privacy in decentralization but you have to recognize that for many of us, there's value in openness. I'm very optimistic about Google making my life better in lots of little ways. I have virtually no concerns about my openness to Google causing me trouble.

"making my life better in lots of little ways" I think that's a common goal and widespread belief and find its implication of having given up on "bigger ways" troubling. Our industry was going to change the world. Rewrite the cultural rules of socializing. Rebuild the economy in a new form. Encourage major cultural and political shifts by empowering the little guy. Bring knowledge to the ignorant, companionship to th…

[deleted]

Re: Not OK, Google

#466
post #434

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bad actors exist. Hence why with every new technology comes new responsibility to use it properly - from nuclear fission to robotics to neural networks. That doesn't mean we need to reference how WW2 Nazis would use it every time a new technology is developed.

"What would the Nazis do with this?" is not wholly inappropriate. It's basically a way of looking at the worst case failure mode, like asking "what would happen to this nuclear reactor if all cooling and backup systems fail at once?" or "what happens to people in the capsule if the rocket explodes during max-Q?" In this case it's "what's the danger of all this lazily deployed insecure ubiquitous surveillance gear in…

>You limit things like surveillance to limit moral hazard.

Not quite sure how you got that out of "with every new technology comes new responsibility". That's neither singling out surveillance nor limiting to moral hazard.

Re: Not OK, Google

#467

"AI" is incredibly overhyped. Most of the features and applications I've seen can be relegated into the "that's neat" category, before they are turned off and never used again. Google recently started telling me how heavy the traffic is on my commute because they've figured out I do it every day, and when I'm doing it. That's nice, but I don't care. I could already get that information from my car's GPS and seeing ho…

> That's nice, but I don't care. I could already get that information from my car's GPS and seeing how red the roads were. I guess people have different experiences. Personally, I know how to get home from work, so I don't feel the need to turn on my GPS every time I drive home. So I appreciate getting notified when there's notable variances in drive times, without me having to look for it every day.

I agree with you both. "turning on GPS" could just mean that while driving one has the view of the roads on to see which one's have traffic, not necessarily getting turn by turn directions to and from work every day.

Re: Not OK, Google

#468
post #372

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's the thing though. I reject the notion that you ever actually make a choice. I would posit that 100% of the actions you take are simply the deterministic reactions when the current world state is filtered through your brain. Then, after the fact, your brain gets busy inventing a reason that you took a particular action and calls it a "choice" when really you were just going to do what you were going to do anywa…

Sure, but philosophical musings on the nature of free will aside, there's a practical worry about the amount of power a private company has over your actions. I'd rather be ordering burgers because they taste good than because a company wanted me too--I expect this will lead to greater happiness for me in the long run.

Yes, but only because your happiness metric maximizes when you exercise your freedom of choice.

Other people's happiness metrics work differently, and all popular web services are popular precisely because they satisfy the unconscious desires of the majority of people.

Re: Not OK, Google

#469

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, for a single data point, myself, most of my family, and most of my friends want AI in their lives. Hell that's the whole purpose behind devices like Google home and Amazon's Echo. People aren't buying them because they look nice, they are buying them because they are a simple voice-operated AI that can answer question and do things for them. You might not want or like it, and that's okay, but don't act like nob…

What do you do with it? Like what is a typical use case / interaction ? Do you ask it to put on a movie or tell you the time ? I totally disagree people wanted all their personal information fed to private corporations in the "cloud" BTW. Completely disagree. It's Orwellian.

>What do you do with it? Like what is a typical use case / interaction ? Do you ask it to put on a movie or tell you the time ?

Control the lights in the house, make sure the garage door and front door are closed and locked at night, adjust the temperature, play some music (specific band, song, or genre) on one of the TVs or on my computer, read me things like the weather, calendar entries, emails, ask it how long it'll take me to get to work right now, ask it about conversions or math-ey things I need done, have it make notes (specifically notes that can alert me when I get to work, or the next time i'm at a supermarket, etc...), set alarms, create calendar entries, send emails/instant messages (almost always short and sweet, but still useful). Have it lookup "knowledge graph" kinds of things like what time a store closes at, when does a music album go on sale, what kind of reviews did [movie] get, when does [movie] come out.

And that's just the stuff I've used it for in the last month or so.

On the phone, it can do even more:

Have it navigate me places, and ask it how long until the next turn while on a motorcycle (through a bluetooth setup in the helmet). It will alert me when I need to leave for work using my usual route, it can infer where I am going when i'm not navigating there, and can alert me about traffic incidents on the route, and suggest an alternate route (this one is fucking cool when it happens). It gives me severe weather alerts for my location, notifies me of things like price drops or new releases of things i'm interested in, and shows me almost an "rss feed" kind of thing for news articles that I'm probably interested in (this one is hit or miss, but i'd say every time I look at least one of them is something I wanted to know about). Just today it gave me a notification that I told it to remember. What I said was "remind me to call my doctor tomorrow afternoon", and about an hour ago it put a notification on my phone saying "call my doctor" with a "call" button on it. When clicking the call button, it started dialing my doctor's office. That's what I want from an AI, and it's working great so far.

>I totally disagree people wanted all their personal information fed to private corporations in the "cloud" BTW. Completely disagree. It's Orwellian.

Well that's a strawman... It's like saying that "people wouldn't want to hand over hundreds of thousands of dollars to get some wood and cement" when talking about buying a house.

People aren't dumb, they know these devices aren't magic. They know that if you ask what the weather is, obviously the device needs to know your location. If you ask it to play some music you like, it obviously needs to know your preferences. If you ask it how long it'll take to drive to work, it needs to know where you work. In most cases people don't want to spend hours on hours setting up every little setting to tell the system all this information, they just want it to work, so it just works. It infers information, it remembers preferences, it figures out connections that you didn't even know where there. And in return you get a wonderful device that can help you in your life. If you don't want that, it's fine. You can not use it, you can have google delete all information associated with you, and you can disable all tracking and gathering.

But let's not pretend that people don't want the outcome that handing over information can provide. They want the AI, and in order to do that, the AI needs to know them. These devices are being sold as being able to learn about you the fastest, and use it the most, it's not like they are being shady here.

Re: Not OK, Google

#470

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think for quite a large number of people, allowing AIs to make decisions for them will probably be better for them.

The same argument was historically made to justify slavery.

And to justify the continued existence of the electoral college.
Post reply on HN