• I Cast Fist
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      40 minutes ago

      And lots of hentai for stuff that is humanly impossible

  • fxdave@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    4 hours ago

    The problem is not the tool. It’s the inability to use the tool without a third party provider.

  • snooggums@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    81
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    10 hours ago

    I disagree with the base premise that being opt out needs to be a right. That implies that having data be harvested for companies to make profits should be the default.

    We should have the right to not have our data harvested by default. Requiring companies to have an opt in process with no coercion or other methods of making people feel obligated to opt in is our right.

    • ItsComplicated@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      32
      ·
      10 hours ago

      being opt out needs to be a right. That implies that having data be harvested for companies to make profits should be the default.

      As the years have passed, it has become the acceptable consensus for all of your personal information, thoughts, and opinions, to become freely available to anyone, at anytime, for any reason in order for companies to profit from it.

      People keep believing this is normal and companies keep taking more. Unless everyone is willing to stand firm and say enough, I only see it declining further, unfortunately.

    • taladar@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      7 hours ago

      We should have the right to not have our data harvested by default.

      I would maybe not go quite that far but at the very least this should apply to commercial interests and living people.

      I think there are some causes where it should be acceptable to have your data usable by default, e.g. statistical analysis of health threats (think those studies about the danger of living near a coal power plant or similar things).

      • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        36 minutes ago

        I disagree. Yes, there are benefits to a lot of invasions of privacy, but that doesn’t make it okay. If an entity wants my information, they can ask me for it.

        One potential exception is for dead people, I think it makes sense for a of information to be released on death and preventing that should be opt in by the estate/survivors, depending on the will.

      • snooggums@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        7 hours ago

        That implies that having data be harvested for companies to make profits should be the default.

        I sure hope those studies are not being done by for profit companies!

    • General_Effort@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      9 hours ago

      We should have the right to not have our data harvested by default.

      How would that benefit the average person?

      • snooggums@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        8 hours ago

        Send me your name, birthdate, web browsing history, online spending history, real time location, and a list of people you know and I will explain it to you.

  • Oxysis/Oxy@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    10 hours ago

    Is it really though? I haven’t touched it since the very early days of slop ai. That was before I learned of how awful it is to real people

    • But_my_mom_says_im_cool@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      9 hours ago

      They don’t mean directly, i guarantee that companies, service providers, etc that you are with do indeed use Ai. That’s what I took the headline to mean. Some facet of everyone’s life uses Ai now

    • But_my_mom_says_im_cool@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      9 hours ago

      You got downvoted because Lemmy users like knee jerk reactions and think that you can unmake a technology or idea. You can’t, Ai is here and it’s forever now. Best we can do is find ways to live with it and like you said, reward those who use it ethically. The Lemmy idea that Ai should be banned and not used is so unrealistic

      • atomicbocks@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        5 hours ago

        You seem to misunderstand the ire;

        AI in its current state has existed for over a decade. Watson used ML algorithms to beat Jeopardy by answering natural language questions in 2011. But techbros have gotten ahold of it and decided that copyright rules don’t apply to them and now the cat is out of the bag?!? From the outside it looks like bootlicking for the same bullshit that told us we would be using blockchain to process mortgages in 10 years… 10 years ago. AI isn’t just here to stay it’s been here for 70 years.

        • ClamDrinker@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 hour ago

          ML technology has existed for a while, but it’s wild to claim that the technology pre-2020 is the same. A breakthrough happened.