this post was submitted on 12 Nov 2025
439 points (98.7% liked)

Technology

87853 readers
3003 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Dyskolos@lemmy.zip 56 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (3 children)

I would bet my right nut on the real reason for all this is some AI-billionaire who aggressively pushes this with moneyz. Having every fart we make soon be analyzed by AI is the best "natural" training there could be.

As a cherry on top is the total surveillance for the state(s). AI will probably do a decent job (despite what the article says) in scanning for potential "threats" to let actual people check.

But I can't even comprehend the power that would be needed to actually scan every shit by every person every minute. No data center in the world has this oomph. So it has to be a simple keyword-search (in all possible languages, even leetspeek and co?) To forward to ai. And if ai would just report 0.5% as "suspicious" for manual human control, it would be more supermassive than a black hole. This is just not doable and hence defeats it's fake reason: protecting the kids.

So that kinda just leaves ai-training and selective easy surveillances without court-orders. Which also won't protect kids. As every criminal out there will find a loophole.

[–] ChaoticEntropy@feddit.uk 11 points 9 months ago

All the current powers that be, private and governmental, can heartily agree that allowing the public to have any expectation of privacy or autonomy is highly undesirable.

[–] Tryenjer@lemmy.world 4 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 children)

Of course, just listen to the CEO of Palantir, he already admitted that that's his goal. By inference, we can extrapolate that this is the goal of all major business leaders of these companies who are developing AI systems. They need more data to compete with China, and if that requires the West to have authoritarian mass surveillance systems, so be it.

https://gizmodo.com/palantir-ceo-says-a-surveillance-state-is-preferable-to-china-winning-the-ai-race-2000683144

[–] REDACTED@infosec.pub 0 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Can we please stop circlejerking AI into everything? The chat control has been in debate before AI was mainstream

[–] Dyskolos@lemmy.zip 4 points 9 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)
[–] REDACTED@infosec.pub -1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

My insight: EU is not interested in training AI for your corporations, neither are personal chats with likely zero accuracy/factuality good training material, neither is sms-style grammar going to improve any existing AI, everything about this is illogical and pretty stupid. It has always been about control, not.. training AI lol

[–] Dyskolos@lemmy.zip 2 points 9 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)
[–] REDACTED@infosec.pub 1 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 children)

Again, that is not a good training material. There have been numerous studies on the type of training data we feed and the result of it. This type of content tends to poison the data and lead to equalivent of brainrot for AI's. This is not very useful data for AI, there are far better sources. Again, seems highly illogical the EU would do all this just to train some shitty AI. Training material should also always be accompanied by context data, which is commonly missing from instant messaging. It's just too big of a mess.

[–] Dyskolos@lemmy.zip 1 points 9 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)
[–] REDACTED@infosec.pub 1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Counter-argument: all my drug dealers use whatsapp. Real life is not movies, criminals are rarely tech savvy.