alt Hacker NewsIt seems to me that adding AI to desktop apps and sending the data back to the mothership for processing is an amazing way to collect data from people who, for the most part, would be completely unaware it's even happening.
Heck, most of them think the Internet is Chrome.
Replies
> adding AI to desktop apps and sending the data back to the mothership for processing is an amazing way to collect data from people
Wasn't that the entire point of Windows Recall as well?
Many around the world search in Facebook and only browse via its in-app browser (sometimes zero-rated / free).
I'd argue that even pre-AI the average internet surfer never thinks about all the data the sites they use collect. I'm not even sure if my mom uses any apps that aren't web apps (maybe MS word).
But for it all to go to one place? That's a scary amount of data.
"Ladies and Gentlemen, may I present to you the Internet."
I called this out when it was announced on here. Supposedly the team lead replied to my comment saying this wouldn't happen. I rolled my eyes but asked will android be able to use those models for ex filtration. No reply. And apparently the original claim was not true either lol.
Maybe I'm misremembering it. Google is awful. My goodness. I hate Android and can't wait to be rid of it. Graphene and it's buddies can't roll it fast enough
According to the current shortage of computing power and electricity, I suspect that what they really want is not your data, but the computing power and electricity from your device.
If users' behaviors can be pre-labeled on their own devices, processed with AI, and then sent back, it might save a significant amount of internal computing costs.
It would be a reasonable deduction for someone who doesn't have the time or interest to understand the internals.
I once had someone ask me why closing the web browser turned off his Internet
The even more frustrating thing here is that after auto-updates everything new [including AI "features"] is turned ON by default.
I do like how Firefox now has a "prevent future AI integrations" checkbox[0], but I just don't believe it anymore (i.e. that it won't magically `uncheck` itself and then enable features I've not requested/authorized).
Which is why I just used an LLM to help me create a local network admin rule to disable the update engine entirely (this SHOULD. NOT. BE. NECESSARY).
[•] <https://www.perplexity.ai/search/b0d3bf5d-7ac7-4d4c-b6c6-32b...>
[0] with a sick darkpattern (for most users to laregly ignore)
I'm just not sure how this gives me control of my information, whether I want it sent or not to Google, and if they're retaining it for training or not.
That last question I don't even want to ask because the first two doesn't seem clear.
This could be simply fixed by adding the feature, and defaulting it off, and letting people learn about it and enable it.
> Heck, most of them think the Internet is Chrome.
In the end Google has achieved something that Microsoft couldn't with Internet Explorer, and won the Browser Wars.
Google managed to aggressively advertise their browser by optional install "offer" within Windows installers of software. And they were aiming exactly at all those who couldn't tell the difference between the web browsers and who were conditioned by more experienced family members, friends etc. to just blindly click "Next Next, Finish". Thus, that was an easy win.
Being here when we had choice between Gecko, Presto, Trident and later WebKit/Blink makes me sad how easily the IT world allowed this nearly 100% monoculture to happen. There are still other browsers but chances that we return to variety and choice of rendering engines are low.