5 ms·

> We know how dangerous it is to let bad actors run amok with AI and our data – if you need a refresher, recall the Cambridge Analytica scandal. Maybe I'm miss

by bko 7y ago

> We know how dangerous it is to let bad actors run amok with AI and our data – if you need a refresher, recall the Cambridge Analytica scandal. Maybe I'm missing something, but what does the Cambridge Analytica scandal have to do with AI? > Rohit Prasad, the scientist in charge of Alexa‘s development, recently gave MIT Technology Review’s Karen Hao one of the most terrifying interviews in modern journalism Is the hyperbole really necessary? > Rohit Prasad, Alexa’s head scientist, has now revealed further details about where Alexa is headed next. The crux of the plan is for the voice assistant to move from passive to proactive interactions. So Alexa will make suggestions or remind you that you need to order toilet paper. Much like Google's Android greets me with the time it would take me to get to work every morning without any prompt. Its really sad that the state of tech reporting is full of this hyperbole and fear mongering. You can have a real discussion about the dangerous of technology and erosion of privacy, but this isn't it.

judge2020 7y ago
> So Alexa will make suggestions or remind you that you need to order toilet paper. Using a microphone, even with an offline ML model, to do things like play music at the right times and (almost certainly) show you ads or ask if you want to buy Amazon product is pretty off-putting. Google Maps and Siri Suggestions uses your phone's behavioral data and location history to figure out when you usually leave for work, but if you said "i need to get to work an hour earlier tomorrow" to someone, it would be weird if your phone or Alexa instantly said "do you want me to remind you to leave earlier?" I don't think it's as off-putting as the article makes it out to be, but it's still pretty creepy; we're almost certainly going to have boomer facebook groups boycotting Alexa for "always listening".
- hwestiii 7y ago
  So you think only boomers will find this sort of thing off putting or creepy?
  - acollins1331 7y ago
    No but they'd be the only people in a Facebook group complaining about it
    - dang 7y ago
      Could you please stop posting unsubstantive comments and/or flamebait to HN? You've been doing it a lot, and we've already had to warn you a lot. I just posted https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21502690 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21502690, but there were several cases before that and plenty of other guidelines violations that I only just saw.
      - deleted 7y ago
        [deleted]
    - CaptainZapp 7y ago
      This boomer doesn't do Facebook (or WhatsApp, or Instagram for that matter). Then again I'm not likely to by a "smart"-speaker anytime soon.
  - Enginerrrd 7y ago
    Yeah, my experience seems to indicate boomers have no concept of digital privacy and it's largely only the younger and more technically literate that care.
- anoplus 7y ago
  It might be hard to boycott AI assistants just like it's hard to boycott facebook. If assistant is powerful enough, people would be willing to onboard.
- dang 7y ago
  Please don't post generational flamebait to HN. It starts generational flamewars on HN. Those are seriously lame and boring. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
  - judge2020 7y ago
    Sorry, I was being more descriptive about which generation wouldn't look deep into what the technology does and would instead jump to conclusions, ie "amazon knows everything you're saying", but I still realize that wasn't appropriate.
treis 7y ago
>Maybe I'm missing something, but what does the Cambridge Analytica scandal have to do with AI? I also missed all the bad things that happened because of Cambridge Analytica. Even if we take their extremely dubious claims about their effectiveness at face value them running amok resulted in politicians being better able to target ads. That's not exactly the stuff of nightmares.
- nooron 7y ago
  I work in digital for the Democratic Party. You are correct. If you look at my comment history you’ll see me affirming this.
- osrec 7y ago
  Well, it sort of is my nightmare. I disagree with hyperbole in general, but politicians being able to easily manipulate truth across vast swathes of society is my idea of a nightmare (a pretty scary one at that).
- save_ferris 7y ago
  Did you watch the Channel 4 report[0]? The CEO of CA clandestinely advertised far more than just ads for the reporter posing as a potential client. They are in the business of winning elections, through whatever means necessary. He openly talked about things like targeting and entrapping political opponents with blackmail via "honeypots". His deputies made some really interesting statements during that report as well. I highly recommend watching the report, it's a fascinating watch. Based on what he was caught saying on camera, in addition to his deputies, and the reporting around their political campaigns in Africa using propaganda that claimed AIDS would come back if so-and-so were elected, it's not a stretch to imagine those people doing everything the can, legally and illegally, to sway an election. 0: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mpbeOCKZFfQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mpbeOCKZFfQ
  - puranjay 7y ago
    But this has always happened in politics. CA just optimized it

by bko 7y ago

judge2020 7y ago

> So Alexa will make suggestions or remind you that you need to order toilet paper. Using a microphone, even with an offline ML model, to do things like play music at the right times and (almost certainly) show you ads or ask if you want to buy Amazon product is pretty off-putting. Google Maps and Siri Suggestions uses your phone's behavioral data and location history to figure out when you usually leave for work, but if you said "i need to get to work an hour earlier tomorrow" to someone, it would be weird if your phone or Alexa instantly said "do you want me to remind you to leave earlier?" I don't think it's as off-putting as the article makes it out to be, but it's still pretty creepy; we're almost certainly going to have boomer facebook groups boycotting Alexa for "always listening".

hwestiii 7y ago
So you think only boomers will find this sort of thing off putting or creepy?
- acollins1331 7y ago
  No but they'd be the only people in a Facebook group complaining about it
  - dang 7y ago
    Could you please stop posting unsubstantive comments and/or flamebait to HN? You've been doing it a lot, and we've already had to warn you a lot. I just posted https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21502690 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21502690, but there were several cases before that and plenty of other guidelines violations that I only just saw.
    - deleted 7y ago
      [deleted]
  - CaptainZapp 7y ago
    This boomer doesn't do Facebook (or WhatsApp, or Instagram for that matter). Then again I'm not likely to by a "smart"-speaker anytime soon.
- Enginerrrd 7y ago
  Yeah, my experience seems to indicate boomers have no concept of digital privacy and it's largely only the younger and more technically literate that care.
anoplus 7y ago
It might be hard to boycott AI assistants just like it's hard to boycott facebook. If assistant is powerful enough, people would be willing to onboard.
dang 7y ago
Please don't post generational flamebait to HN. It starts generational flamewars on HN. Those are seriously lame and boring. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- judge2020 7y ago
  Sorry, I was being more descriptive about which generation wouldn't look deep into what the technology does and would instead jump to conclusions, ie "amazon knows everything you're saying", but I still realize that wasn't appropriate.

treis 7y ago

>Maybe I'm missing something, but what does the Cambridge Analytica scandal have to do with AI? I also missed all the bad things that happened because of Cambridge Analytica. Even if we take their extremely dubious claims about their effectiveness at face value them running amok resulted in politicians being better able to target ads. That's not exactly the stuff of nightmares.

nooron 7y ago
I work in digital for the Democratic Party. You are correct. If you look at my comment history you’ll see me affirming this.
osrec 7y ago
Well, it sort of is my nightmare. I disagree with hyperbole in general, but politicians being able to easily manipulate truth across vast swathes of society is my idea of a nightmare (a pretty scary one at that).
save_ferris 7y ago
Did you watch the Channel 4 report[0]? The CEO of CA clandestinely advertised far more than just ads for the reporter posing as a potential client. They are in the business of winning elections, through whatever means necessary. He openly talked about things like targeting and entrapping political opponents with blackmail via "honeypots". His deputies made some really interesting statements during that report as well. I highly recommend watching the report, it's a fascinating watch. Based on what he was caught saying on camera, in addition to his deputies, and the reporting around their political campaigns in Africa using propaganda that claimed AIDS would come back if so-and-so were elected, it's not a stretch to imagine those people doing everything the can, legally and illegally, to sway an election. 0: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mpbeOCKZFfQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mpbeOCKZFfQ
- puranjay 7y ago
  But this has always happened in politics. CA just optimized it