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

It’s Official: Cars Are the Worst Category We Have Ever Reviewed for Privacy

foundation.mozilla.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 28 posts

Re: It’s Official: Cars Are the Worst Category We Have Ever Reviewed for Privacy

#11

Post by tommiegannert »

Mercedes also had the brilliant idea of sending me updates to their user agreements, around once every 2-3 months. It is 40 pages, and they didn't include a changelog. Yeah, there is nothing I'd like to do more with my expensive car than to read a 40 page legal document every quarter to see if I can, morally, still drive it.

I replied to one, and they actually started stating the changes a few months later. I was probably not the only one thinking "perhaps you should think this one through just a tad more."

Re: It’s Official: Cars Are the Worst Category We Have Ever Reviewed for Privacy

#13

Post by squarefoot »

tommiegannert wrote: post #11

Mercedes also had the brilliant idea of sending me updates to their user agreements, around once every 2-3 months. It is 40 pages, and they didn't include a changelog. Yeah, there is nothing I'd like to do more with my expensive car than to read a 40 page legal document every quarter to see if I can, morally, still drive it. I replied to one, and they actually started stating the changes a few months later. I was pro…

That would be one of the uses AI could excel at: reading license agreements, contracts, etc, to find changes and hidden traps in general then report them to the user.

Re: It’s Official: Cars Are the Worst Category We Have Ever Reviewed for Privacy

#14

Post by Kinrany »

squarefoot wrote: post #13
tommiegannert wrote: post #11

Mercedes also had the brilliant idea of sending me updates to their user agreements, around once every 2-3 months. It is 40 pages, and they didn't include a changelog. Yeah, there is nothing I'd like to do more with my expensive car than to read a 40 page legal document every quarter to see if I can, morally, still drive it. I replied to one, and they actually started stating the changes a few months later. I was pro…

That would be one of the uses AI could excel at: reading license agreements, contracts, etc, to find changes and hidden traps in general then report them to the user.

They likely don't change a lot, so the AI called diff would suffice

Re: It’s Official: Cars Are the Worst Category We Have Ever Reviewed for Privacy

#15

Post by bmitc »

squarefoot wrote: post #13
tommiegannert wrote: post #11

Mercedes also had the brilliant idea of sending me updates to their user agreements, around once every 2-3 months. It is 40 pages, and they didn't include a changelog. Yeah, there is nothing I'd like to do more with my expensive car than to read a 40 page legal document every quarter to see if I can, morally, still drive it. I replied to one, and they actually started stating the changes a few months later. I was pro…

That would be one of the uses AI could excel at: reading license agreements, contracts, etc, to find changes and hidden traps in general then report them to the user.

Couldn't a business exist now that just had a lawyer read the agreements? There's no reason why we need to wait for "AI" to do this, so I would assume either the business idea isn't there or there are no incentives to do so.

Re: It’s Official: Cars Are the Worst Category We Have Ever Reviewed for Privacy

#18

Post by kevincox »

Kinrany wrote: post #14
squarefoot wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That would be one of the uses AI could excel at: reading license agreements, contracts, etc, to find changes and hidden traps in general then report them to the user.

They likely don't change a lot, so the AI called diff would suffice

And provides a much stronger guarantee of correctness.

Re: It’s Official: Cars Are the Worst Category We Have Ever Reviewed for Privacy

#19

Post by goalieca »

squarefoot wrote: post #13
tommiegannert wrote: post #11

Mercedes also had the brilliant idea of sending me updates to their user agreements, around once every 2-3 months. It is 40 pages, and they didn't include a changelog. Yeah, there is nothing I'd like to do more with my expensive car than to read a 40 page legal document every quarter to see if I can, morally, still drive it. I replied to one, and they actually started stating the changes a few months later. I was pro…

That would be one of the uses AI could excel at: reading license agreements, contracts, etc, to find changes and hidden traps in general then report them to the user.

We don’t need technology, this is entirely a legal problem.

Re: It’s Official: Cars Are the Worst Category We Have Ever Reviewed for Privacy

#20

Post by NoZebra120vClip »

bmitc wrote: post #15
squarefoot wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That would be one of the uses AI could excel at: reading license agreements, contracts, etc, to find changes and hidden traps in general then report them to the user.

Couldn't a business exist now that just had a lawyer read the agreements? There's no reason why we need to wait for "AI" to do this, so I would assume either the business idea isn't there or there are no incentives to do so.

Those prepaid legal services should suffice. You know, like Rocket Lawyer or Legal Shield, you pay $30 a month to have a lawyer allegedly on hand.

They will review N pages of legal documents included in the base fee. So you should be able to shovel over your most important EULAs and contracts for them to check out. They may not be able to tell you anything useful, though, since the lawyer who fields the call usually has no idea who you are, just has passed the bar in your state.

Post reply on HN