this post was submitted on 23 May 2025
55 points (100.0% liked)
TechTakes
1873 readers
244 users here now
Big brain tech dude got yet another clueless take over at HackerNews etc? Here's the place to vent. Orange site, VC foolishness, all welcome.
This is not debate club. Unless it’s amusing debate.
For actually-good tech, you want our NotAwfulTech community
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Some of the things you brought up Google does appear to be doing with their AI. Unfortunately I think this is a damned if you do damned if you don't scenario. AI (especially integrated with a security nightmare system like IoT) isn't trustworthy in it's own right, but becomes a security nightmare of epic proportions when you realize that most IoT devices that connect to the Internet don't even have rudimentary security protocols. When you add the fact that Gemini is trying to do IoT and at the same time do things like call screening, text recognition etc (for the purposes of spam removal and scam mitigation), and that to do so it has to collect and monitor your data to do it, you recognize why so many security people are distrustful.
Google says they don't collect that data. That the processing is done ok device rather than requiring to be sent back to Google for processing. They say that this data won't be used to further train the AI. People don't trust it
Isn't the normal path for these things, first they don't so people lock in and then they do. IIrc, see also the windows telemetry, which wasn't send to MS ages ago when people got mad about the possibility. But now it is.
Depends on the company, but yeah it's common. I don't blame people for not trusting Google. Their track record for private data collection and for killing or changing services people use is pretty bad. But these companies are also changing the way they make money. MS has changed money making tactics from selling licenses for products to selling both subscriptions, and utilizing ad aggregation for ad companies (including their own company and products). So that's part of the whole thing and I think it's important to highlight. I don't think MS set people up using their products to then swoop in and change the game. I think they realized they have an untapped market and are trying to get more of people's money so they changed tactics because they already had market share.
Ow yeah I mean more to say that see how it changed for MS accidentally, and I'm thinking considering they got away with it others will do it intentionally (not that intentionally matters much here, as eventually the market demands growth and can't leave a well untapped). The MS change was over decades iirc.