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

91–100 of 236 posts

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

#91

Post by esafak »

pwython wrote: post #53
cousin_it wrote: post #14

This is a great point. Everyone who has talked with chatbots at all: please note that all contents of your past conversations with chatbots (that already exist now, and that you can't meaningfully delete!) could be used in the future to target ads to you, manipulate you financially and politically, and sell "personalized influence on you specifically" as a service to the highest bidder. Just wanted to make sure y'all…

Honestly, retargeting/personalized ads have never bothered me. If I'm gonna see ads anyway, I'd much rather get ads that might actually interest me, versus wildly irrelevant pharmaceutical drugs and other nonsense.

Then why in twenty years of personalization am I still seeing junk ads? I don't want to hear about your drop-shipping or LLM wrapping business. The overwhelming majority of ads are junk. Yes, they bother me.

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

#93

Post by fragmede »

martin-t wrote: post #85
fragmede wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If China gets to ASI first, the nukes won't matter.

ASI doesn't change physics. Perun has a very good explanation why defending against nukes is impossible to do economically compared to just having more nukes and mutually assured destruction: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CpFhNXecrb4

Who said anything about economically?

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

#95

Post by doitLP »

kogasa240p wrote: post #72
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…

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

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

#96

Post by hsartoris »

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!

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

#97

Post by mathgradthrow »

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…

Anyone can just kill you whenever they want. Security cannot be granted by cryptography, only secrecy.

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

#98

Post by ronsor »

alphazard wrote: post #27
dataviz1000 wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> but that goes against the business model. Not if you are selling hardware. If I was Apple, Dell, or Lenovo, I would be pushing for local running models supporting Hugging Face while I full speed developed systems that can do inference locally.

Local models do make a lot of sense (especially for Apple), but it's tough to figure out a business model that would cause a company like OpenAI to distribute weights they worked so hard to train. Getting customers to pay for the weights would be entirely dependent on copyright law, which OpenAI already has a complicated relationship with. Quite the needle to thread: it's okay for us to ingest and regurgitate data wi…

> Getting customers to pay for the weights would be entirely dependent on copyright law

That's assuming weights are even covered by copyright law, and I have a feeling they are not in the US, since they aren't really a "work of authorship"

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

#99

Post by iammrpayments »

giancarlostoro wrote: post #49

I stopped using Facebook because I saw a video of a little Australian girl maybe 7 years old age wise holding a spider bigger than her face in her hand. I wrote the most internet meme comment I could think of “girl let go of that spider, we gotta set the house on fire” hit the button to post, only it did not post, it gave me an account strike. At the time I was the only developer at my employer who managed our Facebo…

The way facebook uses automation to manage their products is a disgrace, they can’t even manage to keep themselves automatically banning a lawyer who happens to be called Mark Zuckerberg: https://www.huffpost.com/entry/mark-zuckerberg-lawsuit-imper...

If you advertise on facebook you’re almost guarantee to have your ad account restricted for no apparent reason and no human being to appeal to, even if you spend big money.

It’s so bad that is common knowledge that you should start a fan page, post random stuff and buy page likes for 5-7 days before you start advertising, otherwise their system will just flag your account.

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

#100

Post by bArray »

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 compel any person commuting through the UK to give over their passwords and devices - you have no right to appeal. Refusing to hand over the password can get you arrested under the Terrorist Act, where they can hold you indefinitely. When arrested under any terrorism offence you also have not right to legal representation.

The days of privacy sailed unnoticed.

Post reply on HN