21–30 of 201 posts
Mozilla, the company that says "we need more than deplatforming", wants me to contribute to the research that will be used for censoring the internet? No thanks.
They were talking about Trump's attack rally, and this was published on 8th of Jan.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They were talking about Trump's attack rally, and this was published on 8th of Jan.
It's clearly tied to this research, and the purpose of it is also pretty clear. Technology is technology. It doesn't care about morality and what's right or wrong.
That is rather uninformed. There is a growing body of research on embedding ethics into technology.
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00146-020-01010-1
Whoever wrote this piece is way too close to... whatever it is Mozilla is doing here. There seems to be an assumption that users will be gleeful to throw their data at legitimate researchers from legitimate institutions doing legitimate work. What "data"? Browsing history? Identity? Something else? Why? What's in it for them? Since when was giving our data to third parties a good idea? There is literally no motivatio…
I read it as "we're protecting your privacy by increasing the number of people who can monitor your activity on our browser." Presumably, the users will be well-endowed and tax-advantaged institutions who could have just bought the information from data-aggregators anyway. I'm starting to see a theme of papering over their technology products with a lot of modern art and hyperbolic language. "Computer scientists, soc…
I don't think they are "making sure" as in "enforcing." It sounds like they are observing and reporting, hopefully in an aggregated fashion.
Whoever wrote this piece is way too close to... whatever it is Mozilla is doing here. There seems to be an assumption that users will be gleeful to throw their data at legitimate researchers from legitimate institutions doing legitimate work. What "data"? Browsing history? Identity? Something else? Why? What's in it for them? Since when was giving our data to third parties a good idea? There is literally no motivatio…
> What "data"? Browsing history? Identity? Something else?
That depends on the Rally study, since research questions differ and studies are required to practice data minimization. Each study is opt in, with both short-form and long-form explanations. Academic studies also involve IRB-approved informed consent. Take a look at our launch study for an example [1].
> Why? What's in it for them? Since when was giving our data to third parties a good idea? There is literally no motivation presented here.
The motivation is enabling crowdsourced scientific research that benefits society. Think Apple Research [2], NYU Ad Observatory [3], or The Markup's Citizen Browser [4]. There are many research questions at the intersection of technology and society where conventional methods like web crawls, surveys, and social media feeds aren't sufficient. That's especially true for platform accountability research; the major platforms have generally refused to facilitate independent research that might identify problems, and platform problems often involve targeting and personalization that other methods can't meaningfully examine.
[1] https://rally.mozilla.org/current-studies/political-and-covi... [2] https://www.apple.com/ios/research-app/ [3] https://adobservatory.org/ [4] https://themarkup.org/citizen-browser
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's clearly tied to this research, and the purpose of it is also pretty clear. Technology is technology. It doesn't care about morality and what's right or wrong.
> Technology is technology. It doesn't care about morality and what's right or wrong. That is rather uninformed. There is a growing body of research on embedding ethics into technology. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00146-020-01010-1
This is just some research while we have surveillance technology and weapons controlled by the AI right now. Get real.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Technology is technology. It doesn't care about morality and what's right or wrong. That is rather uninformed. There is a growing body of research on embedding ethics into technology. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00146-020-01010-1
It doesn't mean anything. You have zero guarantees that anything like that will be actually applied. The government and its military won't ever care about it. This is just some research while we have surveillance technology and weapons controlled by the AI right now . Get real.
How exactly are academic researchers supposed to guarantee that their research will be applied for the good of humanity?
Government is you and me and everyone else.
If you want government to care about it, write to them and tell them to care about it.
They probably aren’t going to care about random comments on HN.
Research on ethical machines has been taking place since the dawn of the drone age and has already guided military policy. You can find the supporting evidence of that for yourself if you search for it.
Whoever wrote this piece is way too close to... whatever it is Mozilla is doing here. There seems to be an assumption that users will be gleeful to throw their data at legitimate researchers from legitimate institutions doing legitimate work. What "data"? Browsing history? Identity? Something else? Why? What's in it for them? Since when was giving our data to third parties a good idea? There is literally no motivatio…
I read it as "we're protecting your privacy by increasing the number of people who can monitor your activity on our browser." Presumably, the users will be well-endowed and tax-advantaged institutions who could have just bought the information from data-aggregators anyway. I'm starting to see a theme of papering over their technology products with a lot of modern art and hyperbolic language. "Computer scientists, soc…
Nope. This is an important point: the type of crowdsourced science that Rally enables is something that researchers couldn't do before. (With the exception of a very small number of teams who made massive investments in building single-purpose crowdsourcing infrastructure from the ground up.)
Whoever wrote this piece is way too close to... whatever it is Mozilla is doing here. There seems to be an assumption that users will be gleeful to throw their data at legitimate researchers from legitimate institutions doing legitimate work. What "data"? Browsing history? Identity? Something else? Why? What's in it for them? Since when was giving our data to third parties a good idea? There is literally no motivatio…
Princeton research collaborator here. Glad to answer questions about Rally. > What "data"? Browsing history? Identity? Something else? That depends on the Rally study, since research questions differ and studies are required to practice data minimization. Each study is opt in, with both short-form and long-form explanations. Academic studies also involve IRB-approved informed consent. Take a look at our launch study…
Whoever wrote this piece is way too close to... whatever it is Mozilla is doing here. There seems to be an assumption that users will be gleeful to throw their data at legitimate researchers from legitimate institutions doing legitimate work. What "data"? Browsing history? Identity? Something else? Why? What's in it for them? Since when was giving our data to third parties a good idea? There is literally no motivatio…
“what data”,for example: https://rally.mozilla.org/privacy-policy/