111–120 of 308 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> here's to hoping this isn't just all bark and there's some actual teeth to his. Let's see what the article says: > When you talk about AI in your advertising, the FTC may be wondering, among other things: (...) Just "wondering", no teeth.
"Wondering" = discovery = you're going to have a bad time
Are you aware of the risks? You need to know about the reasonably foreseeable risks and impact of your AI product before putting it on the market. If something goes wrong – maybe it fails or yields biased results – you can’t just blame a third-party developer of the technology. And you can’t say you’re not responsible because that technology is a “black box” you can’t understand or didn’t know how to test. I'm remind…
Just me, or does this read like a Godfather-style warning? "Nice AI product you got over there. Would be a shame if something happened to it." But what's different about this AI product/hype cycle compared to every other cycle that tech has had? Why does the FTC feel the need to make proactive enforcement warnings about this one? What about crypto? Or going back further, the dotcom era?
This is fascinating, it’s a bit refreshing to see plain text for normal people. I can’t be the only person with extreme anxiety reading Sam Altman’s twitter and wondering if my career choice was the wrong one some days. It would be nice to see if this FTC post tamps down that hype machine?
> reading Sam Altman’s twitter He has made a pronounced and clear shift to a “thought leader” account after the OpenAI-MS investment. That can only mean that OpenAI is dying.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
it hasn't been a problem for the social platforms or other companies operating in the hovering of personal data for profit. the trick is to get too big to fail status before gov't agencies can come shut you down.
> the trick is to get too big to fail status before gov't agencies can come shut you down. While avoiding getting bought by Elon \o/
Earlier quoted context omitted.
FTC is a regulator whose "principal mission is the enforcement of civil (non-criminal) antitrust law". So it is completely fine for them to remind citizens and companies of their obligations. Especially given in the AI space there is so much questionable behaviour going on.
This is not a reminder. It's a casual threat. And minor nit - this has nothing to do with antitrust. If you were going to highlight their mission, at least show the deceptive practices part.
This message is not new. Advertisers should take another look at our earlier AI guidance, which focused on fairness and equity but also said, clearly, not to overpromise what your algorithm or AI-based tool can deliver. Whatever it can or can’t do, AI is important, and so are the claims you make about it. You don’t need a machine to predict what the FTC might do when those claims are unsupported. Really great and omi…
Not ominous, threatening, and somewhat juvenile IMO.
Oh man... And this is a government agency. Such proactive and articulate. No wonder US is where it is for it's wonderful state apparatus. It certainly has its fair share of failures but this is at a whole another level.
Companies are more profitable whenever they can shift that responsibility to the end user or society-as-a-whole.
Technology empowers the individual at the cost of increased personal burden. Often it's not possible to opt-out either for economic of social reasons so responsibility requirements keep increasing
This isn't necessarily good... There's a point where the pressure becomes toxic especially to the life force of children, the young, and aspects associated with the young like carefree spirited living, open-mindedness, lack of existential-crisis', etc...
Everyone becomes "older" and more plastic and robotic, concerned with things like social status, making money, number optimization, etc... (scenes from The Little Prince) and have to deal with things like existential crisis' and depression at a younger age.
An explosion of AI tools is likely going to accelerate this trend...