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

Proton spam and the AI consent problem

dbushell.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 446 posts

Re: Proton spam and the AI consent problem

#201

Post by stackghost »

nxtbl wrote: post #106
stackghost wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Signal is an interesting case study in UX failure. I and a bunch of other tech forward people were on it in its heyday but after they removed SMS support and implemented shitty UX like that nag dialog: Neither I nor a single person I know uses it any more. Everyone is on Whatsapp or iMessage. It may be cryptographically superior, but does that matter at the end of the day if nobody uses it?

Sounds like they just don't care about privacy, do they? Guess showing them https://i.redd.it/0imry50rxy961.png still won't change anything..

That is a thoroughly unconvincing graphic, yeah.

A few of my neighbors have kids the same age as my kids, they're on a WhatsApp group chat, and my choice is either use WhatsApp or make my kid miss out on social events, so it's not really a choice.

"Hey let's switch to this app that nobody else is using and it sends you annoying popups every month but trust me bro it's more secure" is not a winning argument

Re: Proton spam and the AI consent problem

#202

Post by weedhopper »

gingerlime wrote: post #170
Tepix wrote: post #89

I had a similar issue with Microsoft today. They obviously invented a new "Copilot Newsletter" and subscribed my address to it, without my consent. I wonder what the legislation says (I'm in Germany). I know that some business related mails are deemed legal, but this seems to clearly cross the line.

Same. Posted a comment about it [0]. I already filed a GDPR and ePrivacy compliants. Happy to share notes. Contact details in my profile. [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46730206

Here is an interesting case of a failure of the regulations, I’m curious how this goes

https://www.gofundme.com/f/hold-mojang-accountable-for-their...

Re: Proton spam and the AI consent problem

#203

Post by 7bit »

littlecranky67 wrote: post #27
chc4 wrote: post #7

I saw a Mastodon tweet a while ago, which went something like: Do tech companies understand consent?: - [ ] Yes - [ ] Ask me again in a few days

This. We must change laws that the above field is not considered as given consent. And while we are at it, we must change "silence is agreement" to "silence is disagreement". This applies to change of ToS, price increases etc. That means if I don't click a link with a button "I agree", the ToS change is not accepted - that means they have to cancel/delete my account.

Just move to Germany, we have all you asked for.

Re: Proton spam and the AI consent problem

#204

Post by duskdozer »

flexagoon wrote: post #156
shantnutiwari wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I think we must make it clear that this is not related to AI at all Yeah, many companies do that. I unsusbcribed from newline, they still keep spamming me. Funny thing is, they realised they had made a mistake and promised to remove unsubs. One week later, the spam started. The correct solution is the spam button. Always

> The correct solution is the spam button. Always The correct solution is filing complaints with your country's relevant authority

I wish I could without going through a long process involving tons of personal info

Re: Proton spam and the AI consent problem

#205

Post by pixl97 »

ToucanLoucan wrote: post #153
chrisjj wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does?? > I wonder who told Proton that it’s a good idea to copy big tech tactics. The lure of big tech profits.

Genuinely: What profits!?! The only company profiting from AI has been nVidia. Every indicator we've received for this entire alleged industry is companies buying hundreds of millions of dollars in graphics cards that then either sit in warehouses depreciating in value or, worse, are plugged in and immediately start losing money. The tech industry has coasted on it's hypergrowth story for decades, a story laden with…

>All Silicon Valley has to do is to grow up into a mature industry with sensible business practices

Negative sum game: Growing up is easy if it doesn't kill you. The problem with being ethical when everyone else is unethical is that you'll likely go broke.

The next issue is we're seeing, is not that Silicon Valley is ever going to improve, but the bullshit is spreading to eat up every other industry in the US. Engaging in outright fraudulent behavior is A'ok in the US (I mean we even elected a president convicted on a pile of counts of fraud).

Effectively industries cannot manage themselves, we need regulations to prevent them from being bastards. Problem, we elect bastards that cannot keep from committing fraud themselves.

It doesn't get better from here.

Re: Proton spam and the AI consent problem

#206

Post by anonymous908213 »

this_user wrote: post #188
fundatus wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Over in the Proton subreddit we've been wondering if there is currently some kind of Anti-Proton campaign going on. Constantly people will loudly complain about completely benign things and get lot's of people agreeing with them.

Every time there is anything posted about Proton on HN, there is an immediate wave of super negative comments, none of which ever offer any arguments of substance. It's always just some vague allegations, and this has been the case for years. It's pretty obvious what is going on.

These vapid fanboy-esque comments make me significantly more likely to believe that Proton is astroturfing than the inverse that you are implying, that some unspecified actor is engaging in a conspiracy to impugn Proton's reputation. That said, if criticising Proton is indeed a paid vocation and you have some concrete details about where I can get paid for my comments daring to doubt the uncompromising holiness of Proton, I'm all ears.

Re: Proton spam and the AI consent problem

#207

Post by SCdF »

chrisjj wrote: post #185
SCdF wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am in the UK. TBC this isn't a gmail.com email address, this is a paid "small business" workspace against a custom domain. Eventually they backtracked and allowed (I think?) all paid customers to disable gemini, but I had already migrated to Fastmail so :shrug:

Ah. My addresses are @gmail.com. Perhaps the fact you paid got you marked as a likely gull :)

I think in that case you have even less ability to turn that stuff off? If it's not there for you yet, perhaps it's a slow rollout still?

Re: Proton spam and the AI consent problem

#208

Post by kmeisthax »

ToucanLoucan wrote: post #153
chrisjj wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does?? > I wonder who told Proton that it’s a good idea to copy big tech tactics. The lure of big tech profits.

Genuinely: What profits!?! The only company profiting from AI has been nVidia. Every indicator we've received for this entire alleged industry is companies buying hundreds of millions of dollars in graphics cards that then either sit in warehouses depreciating in value or, worse, are plugged in and immediately start losing money. The tech industry has coasted on it's hypergrowth story for decades, a story laden with…

If you're not the shareholder, you're the product.

The business model of any publicly traded corporation, at least in 2025, is to increase the value of its circulating stock. No more and no less. The nominal business model of the company is a cover story to make line go up. The reason why the stock price matters is because of access to capital markets: if a business wants to buy another business, they are not going to dip into the cash on hand. They are going to take out a loan, and that loan is collateralized by... the value of the business. Which is determined by the stock price.

So if you can keep the line going up, you can keep buying competitors. But if you act like a normal, mature business, you can't.

Profit as a concept is a concern for capitalism. But these businesses are not interested in capitalism, they're angling to become the new lords of a growing feudal economy. That's what "going meta" really means.

Re: Proton spam and the AI consent problem

#209

Post by fundatus »

7bit wrote: post #199
fundatus wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Over in the Proton subreddit we've been wondering if there is currently some kind of Anti-Proton campaign going on. Constantly people will loudly complain about completely benign things and get lot's of people agreeing with them.

Calling it an "anti- Proton campaign" or "benign" is just rhetorical hand waving. Those words let you dismiss criticism without engaging with the substance. Proton did deliberately email people who opted out. That is a GDPR violation, full stop. They are a large, well resourced company; "oops" is not an excuse. Criticism over that is not hysteria or bandwagoning, and blaming people for speaking up instead of the comp…

[flagged]

Re: Proton spam and the AI consent problem

#210

Post by philipwhiuk »

lawtalkinghuman wrote: post #83
ivan_gammel wrote: post #19

I think we must make it clear that this is not related to AI at all, even if the product in question is AI-related. It is a very common problem with modern marketing teams, that have zero empathy for customers (even if they have one, they will never push back on whatever insane demands come from senior management). This is why any email subscription management interface now is as bloated as a dead whale. If too many…

> I think we must make it clear that this is not related to AI at all There are clear AI-specific reasons why it's being crammed down everybody's necks. Namely: someone in management has bet the entire strategy on it. The strategy is not working and they need to juice the numbers desperately.

It's not really AI itself though, it's just whatever the current hype cycle is - it was crypto and cloud before this.
Post reply on HN