Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Amazon introduces Nova Chat

aboutamazon.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 56 posts

Re: Amazon introduces Nova Chat

#31

Post by pclmulqdq »

piltdownman wrote: post #26
lazystar wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

GDPR is a double edged sword

GDPR is simply ahead of its time from an American perspective. Like Mobile Telephony in Europe when pagers were still a thing in the US. In time the average american consumer will understand the monetary value of their PII and usage metadata and demand adequate protections - which effectively is all that GDPR does. Given the actions of the current cabinet, I feel we are in fact accelerating towards this inevitable ou…

GDPR does more than demand protections. It demands data locality. It demands that encryption and access controls be done in a certain way. It backs up its demands (that are sometimes vague) with huge fines.

Re: Amazon introduces Nova Chat

#33

Post by wiether »

placardloop wrote: post #30
atonse wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My guess is it's also about enterprise agreements. For many larger enterprises, governments, etc, the barrier to trying these things is to pay for them (new contracts, RFPs, etc). But all of them already have enterprise agreements with MS, Amazon, etc. So there must be some class of customers to whom it's easy to just add this to their AWS bill.

This isn’t an AWS product, it’s Amazon (the non-AWS side). I don’t think this has anything to do with AWS billing. AWS already has Amazon Q, which is its chatbot offering for AWS customers.

I'm sorry?

https://aws.amazon.com/ai/generative-ai/nova/

Re: Amazon introduces Nova Chat

#37

Post by skyyler »

kridsdale1 wrote: post #34
ARandomerDude wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it was a pun. "No va" in Spanish means "it doesn't go."

See “Chevy Nova”

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/chevrolet-nova-name-spanis...

Often repeated, but it doesn't make any sense to Spanish speakers. Nova is a word on its own.

Would an English speaker assume a hammer is made of ham?

Re: Amazon introduces Nova Chat

#38

Post by NBJack »

oezi wrote: post #36
kristjansson wrote: post #35

Seems like there's going to be some trademark conflict with https://novaapp.ai/ ?

Nova because it just means 'new' isn't a term anybody can trademark.

That's a very meta comment, but I'll have to mark it with an X. Would you like an apple for your efforts?

Re: Amazon introduces Nova Chat

#39

Post by littlestymaar »

skyyler wrote: post #37
kridsdale1 wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

See “Chevy Nova”

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/chevrolet-nova-name-spanis... Often repeated, but it doesn't make any sense to Spanish speakers. Nova is a word on its own. Would an English speaker assume a hammer is made of ham?

English speakers seem to belive that it makes sense to call “cheeseburger” a Hamburger with cheese, so who knows.

Re: Amazon introduces Nova Chat

#40

Post by piltdownman »

pclmulqdq wrote: post #31
piltdownman wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

GDPR is simply ahead of its time from an American perspective. Like Mobile Telephony in Europe when pagers were still a thing in the US. In time the average american consumer will understand the monetary value of their PII and usage metadata and demand adequate protections - which effectively is all that GDPR does. Given the actions of the current cabinet, I feel we are in fact accelerating towards this inevitable ou…

GDPR does more than demand protections. It demands data locality. It demands that encryption and access controls be done in a certain way. It backs up its demands (that are sometimes vague) with huge fines.

It really doesn't do anything more than mandate consumer side protection.

Data locality in legally compatible jurisdictions is the most fundamental form of protection there is. Without concepts such as Safe Harbour and data locality, handling of PII would be farcical amongst MNCs.

Re: Demands on Encryption? The most prominent mention of encryption is in Article 32(1)(a), which mentions the “pseudonymisation and encryption of personal data” as measures that organisations can adopt.

However, it is important to note that encryption is not compulsory. Instead, the GDPR takes a risk-based approach, meaning that the decision to encrypt data depends on the sensitivity of the data, the risks involved, and the potential impact on data subjects.

Backing up demands with fines is about the only way consumer protections are realised as corporate mandates rather than friendly advisory. Name me another comparable legislation that achieves its goals without resort to punitive measures for non-compliance?

In short, you would far better understand the intent, purpose, and reality of GDPR if you engaged with it as a piece of vital EU consumer protection legislation, rather than some sort of draconian shake-down of American Capitalist practices.

Post reply on HN