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

AI surveillance should be banned while there is still time

gabrielweinberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 236 posts

Re: AI surveillance should be banned while there is still time

#211

Post by fsflover »

reaperducer wrote: post #107
jazzyjackson wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wish I could fund an as campaign to free people from the perception that ads are to sell you products Ads are there to change your behavior to make you more likely to buy products, e.g., put downward pressure on your self esteem to make you feel "less than" unless you live a lifestyle that happens to involve buying X product They are not made in your best interest, they are adverserial psycho-tech that have a side…

Ads are there to change your behavior to make you more likely to buy products You have described one type of ad. There are many many types of ads. If you were actually knowledgeable about this, you'd know that basic fact.

Could you enlighten us?

Re: AI surveillance should be banned while there is still time

#212

Post by Melting_Harps »

sensanaty wrote: post #203
alphazard wrote: post #10

I 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…

Sam "Harvest Your Biometric Data For A Scamcoin" Altman? Real trustworthy bloke, I'm sure. We should all buy some worldcoin by giving him our eye scans, in the name of privacy of course.

> Real trustworthy bloke

You do realize he became King maker by position himself in YC, who is the owner/operator of Hackernews. What makes you think you are not being traced here, and your messages are not being used to train his LLM?

As far as him being a conman, if you haven't realized that most of the SV elite, that this place worships, are all conmen (See Trump Dinner this week) with clear ties to the intelligence agency (see newly appointed generals who are C-suite in several Mag 7 corps) who will placate a fascist in order to push their agenda(s) then you simply aren't paying attention.

His scam coin is the most insipid of his rap sheet at this point, and I say this as a person who has seen all kind of grifting in that space.

Re: AI surveillance should be banned while there is still time

#213

Post by mnky9800n »

kbaker wrote: post #170
terribleperson wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm suspended on reddit for, as best as I can tell, posting a DFhack bug fix script. For the uninitiated, this is a bug fix script for a program commonly used in Dwarf Fortress moderating, not anything illicit. If this kind of low-quality AI moderation is the future, I'm not sure if these major platforms will even remain usable.

Lol. I got perma-banned for violating rules under my alt accounts. But I don't have any alt accounts...??? Appeal process is a joke. I just opted to delete my 12 year old account instead and have stopped going there. Oh well, probably time for them to go under and be reborn anyways. The default subs and front page has been garbage for some time.

i deleted my reddit account because the feed is organized for you. It is entirely possible that reddit will organize a feed designed to make you come to a certain conclusion across viewing a number of posts. And whether this is done purposefully by some bad actor or it is done because some algorithm latches on to a particular theme, it doesn't matter. I prefer that things be voted directly without interference, which I assume is how hacker news works.

The other thing is that it is simply a complete waste of time. Commenting on pop culture or news or whatever, when I could be reading books, working on projects, or otherwise interacting with people in the real world is better. We don't have so much time on Earth, I am not sure I want to keep spending so much of it in cyberspace.

https://sustainableviews.substack.com/p/the-day-i-kissed-com...

Re: AI surveillance should be banned while there is still time

#214

Post by lumost »

immibis wrote: post #197
lumost wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We already live in this world for health insurance. The ai can make plausible sounding denials which a doctor can rubber stamp. You have no ability to sue the doctor for malpractice, you cannot appeal the decision. Medical insurance is quickly becoming a simple scam where you are forced to pay a private entity that refuses to ever perform its function.

Worth noting this isn't hypothetical. There was a story a while back where a health insurance company would hire real doctors to sit at computers all day clicking "accept AI resolution" over and over (they were fired if they rejected AI resolutions) because the law required that.

Yup! Just fought three denials with Cigna over the last 6 months for rejections of basic appointments for a physical, an ambulance ride for a family member, and one bigger ticket health expense.

They haven’t approved a single insurance claim submitted without calling and fighting it out with them. Each rejection letter looks plausible, although often nonsensical given the situation.

Re: AI surveillance should be banned while there is still time

#215

Post by iambateman »

beepbooptheory wrote: post #8
iambateman wrote: post #2

If 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" d…

The country who most effectively deploys AI models has a big advantage over countries who bury their head in the sand.

I believe that LLM’s will have the capability to fill in for human workers in many important ways. It’s like getting an economic infusion without the associated population growth required.

But we aren’t there yet, so innovation looks like continuing to build out how to efficiently use AI tools. Not necessarily better models, but longer memory, more critical reasoning, etc.

At the same time…there are winner-take-all dynamics and possibility to weaponize that are not good for society in the long-term.

So we need to both encourage innovation while making sure we don’t kill each other in the process.

Re: AI surveillance should be banned while there is still time

#216

Post by [deleted] »

doitLP wrote: post #95
kogasa240p wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Interesting find, wasn't he selling info to Microsoft?

This is baseless with no references or citations. What possible incentive would he have for sounding this alarm and urging congress to act when he could be using the data he secretly is collecting for his own gain when all the AI companies are doing it openly for obvious gain

[deleted]

Re: AI surveillance should be banned while there is still time

#218

Post by pixxel »

8bitsrule wrote: post #202
bArray wrote: post #100

Protected chats? The ship already sailed, text messages via the phone network are already MITM'd since a very long time. Even in real life, the police in the UK now deploy active face recognition and makes tonnes of arrests based on it (sometimes wrongly). Shops are now looking to deploy active face recognition to detect shoplifters (although it's unclear legally what they will actually do about it). The UK can compe…

No devices, no passwords were ever required of any of us (yet). We deliberately walked into this, we can walk right back out again. Will we have to make do with less? (Did we really need it anyway?) While I owned a cellphone, I never left the house with it. While using it, my location was always known. None of this is terribly new. For decades our names and addresses were collected in telephone books (along with our…

[dead]

Re: AI surveillance should be banned while there is still time

#219

Post by giancarlostoro »

kbaker wrote: post #170
terribleperson wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm suspended on reddit for, as best as I can tell, posting a DFhack bug fix script. For the uninitiated, this is a bug fix script for a program commonly used in Dwarf Fortress moderating, not anything illicit. If this kind of low-quality AI moderation is the future, I'm not sure if these major platforms will even remain usable.

Lol. I got perma-banned for violating rules under my alt accounts. But I don't have any alt accounts...??? Appeal process is a joke. I just opted to delete my 12 year old account instead and have stopped going there. Oh well, probably time for them to go under and be reborn anyways. The default subs and front page has been garbage for some time.

If you appeal every so often I've heard it works, but its even dumber.

Re: AI surveillance should be banned while there is still time

#220

Post by citizenpaul »

hsartoris wrote: post #96
citizenpaul wrote: post #63

Lets not forget that Gabereial Weinburg is a two faced ghoul or wolf in sheep clothing. He has literally said he does not believe people need privacy yet that supposedly is the duckduckgo's main selling point. He has made all kinds of tracking deals with other companies so duckduckgo "is not tracking you" just their partners are. Most of the controversial stuff he has done is being whitewashed from the internet and i…

This is a pretty serious allegation, but cursory searching didn’t yield anything. Do you have any sources you can point to? Being as it’s very difficult to actually ‘whitewash’ things from the internet, I would expect there is something to point to. Thanks!

A few years back the CEO gabe, got in some internet flame war and straight up said only a few people in the world deserve privacy. I cannot find it anymore like I said whitewashed. Also the indirect sale of data can still be found.
Post reply on HN