191–200 of 227 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Whatsapp, Signal, Telegram, iCloud
Please cite where Signal is not e2ee.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There was a discussion here on hn about OpenAI and it's privacy. Same confusion about e2ee. Users thinking e2ee is possible when you chat with an ai agent. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45908891
>Users thinking e2ee is possible when you chat with an ai agent. It shouldn't be any harder than e2ee chatting with any other user. It's just instead of the other end chatting using a keyboard as an input they chat using a language model to type the messages. Of course like any other e2ee solution, the person you are talking to also has access to your messages as that's the whole point, being able to talk to them.
That's not given in any of those examples. In the case of ChatGPT and this toilet sensor e2ee is almost equivalent to 'we use https'. But nowadays everybody uses https, so it does not sound as good in marketing.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm not sure how you can call chatgpt "ostensibly my own computer" when it's primarily a website. And honestly, E2EE's strict definition (messages between user 1 and user 2 cannot be decrypted by message platform)... Is unambiguously possible for chatGPT. It's just utterly pointless when user2 happens to also be the message platform. If you message support for $chat_platform (if there is such a thing) do you expect t…
> it's primarily a website … unambiguously possible[sic] for chatGPT … happens to also be the message platform I assume you mean impossible, and in either case that’s not quite accurate. The “end” is a specific AI model you wished to communicate with, not the platform. You’re suggesting they are one and the same, but they are not and Google proves that with their own secure LLM offering. But I’m 100% with you on it b…
I'm not familiar with the referenced Google secure LLM, but offhand- if it's TEE based- Google would be publishing auditable/signed images and Intel/AMD would be the third party Attesting that's whats actually running. TEEs are way out of my expertise though, and there's a ton of places and ways for it to break down.
Imagine the collective brainpower that could be used to help solve the world's ills, and instead decided, no, what we need is a camera pointed at your asshole which we feed into an AI-powered SaaS we can then sell to you for a subscription. This industry is finished.
https://images.ctfassets.net/veq5rt4lbvkn/2bpiwr3gYoRPnXqB8e...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I do not think this matches anyones' mental model of what "end-to-end encrypted" for a conversation between me and what is ostensibly my own computer should look like. If you promise end-to-end encryption, and later it turns out your employees have been reading my chat transcripts...
I'm not sure how you can call chatgpt "ostensibly my own computer" when it's primarily a website. And honestly, E2EE's strict definition (messages between user 1 and user 2 cannot be decrypted by message platform)... Is unambiguously possible for chatGPT. It's just utterly pointless when user2 happens to also be the message platform. If you message support for $chat_platform (if there is such a thing) do you expect t…
This is basically the whole thrust of Apple's Private Cloud Compute architecture. It is possible to build a system that prevents user2 from reading the chats, but it's not clear that most companies want to work within those restrictions.
> If you message support for $chat_platform (if there is such a thing) do you expect them to be unable to read the messages?
If they marketed it as end-to-end encrypted? 100%, unambiguously, yes. And certainly not without I, as the user, granting them access permissions to do so.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
e2ee implies that there is a third party who can't read the messages. If you are chatting with an AI, who is the third party?
Ideally, both OpenAI employees and the 3-letter agencies?
If the provider controls one of the ends then the feds can instruct them to tap that end and nobody is any the wiser.
The best you can do is either to run the inference in an outside jurisdiction (hard for large scale AI), or to attempt a warrant canary.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Please cite where Signal is not e2ee.
The problem is that you have to trust that they'll stay that way, and we have no way of proving that the app that runs on your phone comes from the same source that they publish.
Imagine the collective brainpower that could be used to help solve the world's ills, and instead decided, no, what we need is a camera pointed at your asshole which we feed into an AI-powered SaaS we can then sell to you for a subscription. This industry is finished.
It's pointed at the toilet bowl contents though it may catch some scrot in the edge of frame depending upon ambient temperatures. https://images.ctfassets.net/veq5rt4lbvkn/2bpiwr3gYoRPnXqB8e...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah I hate to kill the party but if you can’t imagine a need for this product, consider yourself blessed. GI issues are not pleasant. An ADA toilet at Home Depot is $300 so even the price isn’t that outrageous, honestly. It’s a unique niche product so it’s gonna be a little bit pricey. I don’t know, it just feels a bit gauche to make jokes about a medical device. Nobody’s buying this unless they need it, and if they…
It's the idea of buying it that's nonsensical. I'm not sure how you could realistically use this thing long term. Someone has to sort through the data, spot trends, and offer competent advice. Presumably once you have your diet under control then there is no further need of this bowl level analysis. If you continue to have GI issues anyways, perhaps due to genetic causes, then what is constant surveillance of the sit…
