AI surveillance should be banned while there is still time
gabrielweinberg.com
AI surveillance should be banned while there is still time
1–10 of 236 posts
Re: AI surveillance should be banned while there is still time
#2If the author sees this…could you go one step further, what policy specifically do you recommend?
It seems like having LLM providers not train on user data is a big part of it. But is using traditional ML models to do keyword analysis considered “AI” or “surveillance”?
The author…and this community in general…are much more prepared to make full recommendations about what AI surveillance policy should be. We should be super clear to try to enact good regulation without killing innovation in the process.
Re: AI surveillance should be banned while there is still time
#3The problem is, we have to take the word of companies for our privacy.
Re: AI surveillance should be banned while there is still time
#4If the author sees this…could you go one step further, what policy specifically do you recommend? It seems like having LLM providers not train on user data is a big part of it. But is using traditional ML models to do keyword analysis considered “AI” or “surveillance”? The author…and this community in general…are much more prepared to make full recommendations about what AI surveillance policy should be. We should be…
the law could be as simple as requiring to blur faces and body silhouettes of all people inside each camera, prior to any further processing in the cloud, ensuring privacy of the CCTV footage.
Re: AI surveillance should be banned while there is still time
#5This is an argument against chatbots in general, not just surveillance.
Re: AI surveillance should be banned while there is still time
#6AI makes large scale retroactive thought policing practical. This is terrifying.
Re: AI surveillance should be banned while there is still time
#7This is an argument against chatbots in general, not just surveillance.
Doesn't seem the case because they do end up advertising the duckduckgo chatbot as a safe alternative.
Re: AI surveillance should be banned while there is still time
#8If the author sees this…could you go one step further, what policy specifically do you recommend? It seems like having LLM providers not train on user data is a big part of it. But is using traditional ML models to do keyword analysis considered “AI” or “surveillance”? The author…and this community in general…are much more prepared to make full recommendations about what AI surveillance policy should be. We should be…
From the TFA:
> That’s why we (at DuckDuckGo) started offering Duck.ai for protected chatbot conversations and optional, anonymous AI-assisted answers in our private search engine. In doing so, we’re demonstrating that privacy-respecting AI services are feasible.
I don't know if its a great idea, or just I wonder what does make it feasible, but there is a kind of implied recommendation here.
By "killing innovation" do you just mean: "we need to allow these companies to make money in possibly a predatory way, so they have the money to do... something else"? Or what is the precise concern here? What facet needs to be innovated upon?
Re: AI surveillance should be banned while there is still time
#9If the author sees this…could you go one step further, what policy specifically do you recommend? It seems like having LLM providers not train on user data is a big part of it. But is using traditional ML models to do keyword analysis considered “AI” or “surveillance”? The author…and this community in general…are much more prepared to make full recommendations about what AI surveillance policy should be. We should be…
Thanks (author here). I am working on a follow-up post (and likely posts) with specific recommendations.
Re: AI surveillance should be banned while there is still time
#10I expect we will continue to see the big AI companies pushing for privacy protections. Sam Altman made a comparison to attorney-client privilege in an interview. There is a significant hold out to using these things as fully trusted personal assistants or personal knowledge bases because of the lack of privacy.
The only real solution is locally running models, but that goes against the business model. So instead they will seek regulation to create privacy by fiat. Fiat privacy still has all the same problems as telling your therapist that you killed someone, or keeping your wallet keys printed out on paper in a safe. It's dependent on regulations and definitions of greater good that you can't control.