andruid

joined 3 years ago
[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

They are generally mutually beneficial. Counter surveillance benefits from supporting privacy prevents malicious actors from exploiting the members of a nation. So I lean heavily towards supporting privacy as a matter of supporting both. The exceptions are in the true extremes in which, even after serious deliberation in a democratically agreed apon system, the demand for exposure is too high to ignore.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 year ago (7 children)

I disabled shorts and went through my front page and said to not show me stupid addictive content and then also took two weeks off. I also used libredirect addon on Firefox to redirect all YouTube links to inviduos so that if a link somewhere took me there I didn't get sucked right back.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

Buying and collecting non actionable data to your companies immediate goals is a large business expense that should actually compared to benefits it brings you. It also represents an increased liability on your part, as securing that data against malicious, including state actors, is now on you to handle.

The ideal should be to minimize data storage and collection and maximize the amount of processing done your customer's hardware, for both reduction of CAPX and to get your time from collection to action for the customer as low as possible.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

There is a difference between the of power the state and larger corporations can exert to get "consent" to waive our rights, hence the need for unwaivable (or near unwaivable) rights.

This idea of treating corporations the same as people is why when you accept EULAs it's treated the same as if you agreed to agreeing to let a person you know to have the same info.

[–] [email protected] 59 points 1 year ago (2 children)

"Israel's massive surveillance system failed. We need to massively invest in the same approach here."

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (2 children)

We need to have an honest conversation and additional amendments as to limitations as to businesses incorporated with the State should have imposed on them. They are clearly apart of what anyone would call "the state" IMHO.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago

I am in the boat that it could be a great thing, but it's the systems around that just currently don't have the level of trust to really leverage it.

If local AI used with systems with absolutely minimal storage and good p2p levels of permission were used and laws to minimize abuse by the state and corporations were in place it would different.

By example the opposite of what Ring represents would be good to me.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Couldn't the fact that AI generated content be reproduceable if give the exact parameters(or coordinates in latent space) and model help remove the confusion? Include those as meta data and train investigators on how to use to distinguish generated content from actual evidence.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

Providing information for your care providers to act on it. At least that's why I would WANT to have it. Is it being effectivly used like that though? I have no idea.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

Do you like small talk? I feel like that's been a delimiting factors for me and my friends.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago

That because being perfectly anonymous against all of the most advanced actors is near impossible that it's not worth it. Every step taken DOES help reduce the amount of info out there on you and the amount of parties that have access to it. Not only that every step you take helps those around you too.

view more: ‹ prev next ›