41–50 of 146 posts
Here is my story. I needed to buy central console for my car (purchased it a while ago in used cars lot). Went to Amazon and made my selection. Next thing is I see is the warning: this particular console will not fit you car which is MAKE: XXXY, MODEL: YYYY, YEAR: ZZZZ. How's that for data sharing.
This is my surprised face -_- If you're shocked or even the slightest bit surprised, then I can't imagine how blissful your life is to be so unaware about how much corporations are sharing data with each other. Like, I wholeheartedly expect that if I mention Beyblade toys on Facebook, then the next time I visit Amazon, they'll be suggesting Beyblades even if I've never even searched Amazon for toys, let alone Beyblad…
That's literally Meta's business model, they will happily explain how thats going for them in public investors' calls every few months. With deepseek and bytedance things are a lot less clear cut.
This is my surprised face -_- If you're shocked or even the slightest bit surprised, then I can't imagine how blissful your life is to be so unaware about how much corporations are sharing data with each other. Like, I wholeheartedly expect that if I mention Beyblade toys on Facebook, then the next time I visit Amazon, they'll be suggesting Beyblades even if I've never even searched Amazon for toys, let alone Beyblad…
>I wholeheartedly expect that if I mention Beyblade toys on Facebook...
Isn't the lede here that this isn't just some random data sharing agreement between companies, but that these are both Chinese companies, and the recipient of the data has been banned in the U.S. precisely because of data concerns?
I guess we know how many bots are commenting on this article based on how many of them are talking about the US, when the article is about South Korea?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's literally Meta's business model, they will happily explain how thats going for them in public investors' calls every few months. With deepseek and bytedance things are a lot less clear cut.
How-so less clear-cut? Mysterious and Chinesey so perhaps?
Stop looking at any opportunity to bark as Sinophobia.
If they sold it, isn't that like what... literally almost every single company does nowadays unless you pay up?
I don't think so. You can't buy user data from Google or Facebook or Apple or Microsoft and they probably have more of it than anybody else.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
(a) The BBC is not America, (b) South Korea is not America. It helps to at least browse the first paragraph before commenting.
From the 5th paragraph of the article, Americans are complaining: > Since then, multiple countries have warned that user data may not be properly protected, and in February a US cybersecurity company alleged potential data sharing between DeepSeek and ByteDance.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't think so. You can't buy user data from Google or Facebook or Apple or Microsoft and they probably have more of it than anybody else.
No, but they let you leverage it.
It's quite literally the difference between exposing a public API and actually handing over the contents of the database.
Some missing context is that the data is shared via the DeepSeek app's use of ByteDance analytics/configuration frameworks. So not a backroom deal where DeekSeek handed over the chat history for its user base, but rather ongoing analytics data being sent from the DeepSeek mobile app. Here's the SecurityScoreCard article that brought attention to this: https://securityscorecard.com/blog/a-deep-peek-at-deepseek/#... Be…
In fact, I wonder if it may further underscore their concerns, given that it surfaces the interconnectedness between all of these firms.
[flagged]