4 ms·

Does TikTok, Android/Google,Instagram use make the same friends and family think about privacy and data? From a cursory look at...nearly everyone...i'd say the

Does TikTok, Android/Google,Instagram use make the same friends and family think about privacy and data? From a cursory look at...nearly everyone...i'd say the answer is a resounding no

edrxty 4y ago
When Facebook came around we all knew it would be a disaster, and it was. When TikTok/Instagram replaced it, we knew it would be worse, and it was. Now we have LLMs that vanishingly few people in the greater public actually understand and we know they'll be used for every possible evil imaginable at scale. I'm not optimistic. See you all in the hellish afterscape.
- wkat4242 4y ago
  Actually, Instagram was pretty sane for a long time. Until recently it just showed me who I followed and nothing else. Now they're trying to complete with TikTok and I get all these crappy suggested reels and it's turning me off the platform. But for a long time it was pretty good unlike Facebook that ruined itself with its algorithmic feed.
- takeda 4y ago
  > When Facebook came around we all knew it would be a disaster, and it was. Not really. When Facebook started as college exclusive social site it seem quite innocent. Later when it created news-feed, opened up to everyone etc it became a cesspool. Once people started getting their news from it, that's when it became dangerous.
  - edrxty 4y ago
    We were freaked out about it way back in 2010 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1289997 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1289997
albntomat0 4y ago
Privacy concerns and ChatGPT have different failure modes. If ChatGPT fabricates a link or makes something up, there's a potential feedback mechanism. E.g. I ask ChatGPT to explain a science term, and then I get told that my understanding is incorrect in class when I use the ChatGPT definition. It doesn't exist for every use case, but I'm hopeful everyone will be "bitten" once by ChatGPT etc., and then folks will verify its output appropriately.
- grp000 4y ago
  This doesn't seem much different to me than how people should use wikipedia. It looks like it will be a useful tool to use, you just can't be careless.
  - alfalfasprout 4y ago
    Wikipedia has moderation and standards for sourcing, etc. that has made it generally very reliable. ChatGPT is a fancy parrot that sounds reliable. To actually verify that its output is correct requires more work and cross-referencing sources, etc.
    - grp000 4y ago
      That's a good point. For more complex topics, the act of verifying correctness is also more complex. I think it's a fair tradeoff though. A more powerful tool also requires more work to use CORRECTLY. Now, whether people will actually put in due diligence is another matter.
labrador 4y ago
Most people don't care about ad tracking or profiling. Nobody in real life complains about it. They get it that "free" means ad tracking. People care very much about making good decisions so they will be careful about blindly trusting the output of a machine.

Does TikTok, Android/Google,Instagram use make the same friends and family think about privacy and data? From a cursory look at...nearly everyone...i'd say the answer is a resounding no

edrxty 4y ago

When Facebook came around we all knew it would be a disaster, and it was. When TikTok/Instagram replaced it, we knew it would be worse, and it was. Now we have LLMs that vanishingly few people in the greater public actually understand and we know they'll be used for every possible evil imaginable at scale. I'm not optimistic. See you all in the hellish afterscape.

wkat4242 4y ago
Actually, Instagram was pretty sane for a long time. Until recently it just showed me who I followed and nothing else. Now they're trying to complete with TikTok and I get all these crappy suggested reels and it's turning me off the platform. But for a long time it was pretty good unlike Facebook that ruined itself with its algorithmic feed.
takeda 4y ago
> When Facebook came around we all knew it would be a disaster, and it was. Not really. When Facebook started as college exclusive social site it seem quite innocent. Later when it created news-feed, opened up to everyone etc it became a cesspool. Once people started getting their news from it, that's when it became dangerous.
- edrxty 4y ago
  We were freaked out about it way back in 2010 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1289997 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1289997

albntomat0 4y ago

Privacy concerns and ChatGPT have different failure modes. If ChatGPT fabricates a link or makes something up, there's a potential feedback mechanism. E.g. I ask ChatGPT to explain a science term, and then I get told that my understanding is incorrect in class when I use the ChatGPT definition. It doesn't exist for every use case, but I'm hopeful everyone will be "bitten" once by ChatGPT etc., and then folks will verify its output appropriately.

grp000 4y ago
This doesn't seem much different to me than how people should use wikipedia. It looks like it will be a useful tool to use, you just can't be careless.
- alfalfasprout 4y ago
  Wikipedia has moderation and standards for sourcing, etc. that has made it generally very reliable. ChatGPT is a fancy parrot that sounds reliable. To actually verify that its output is correct requires more work and cross-referencing sources, etc.
  - grp000 4y ago
    That's a good point. For more complex topics, the act of verifying correctness is also more complex. I think it's a fair tradeoff though. A more powerful tool also requires more work to use CORRECTLY. Now, whether people will actually put in due diligence is another matter.

labrador 4y ago

Most people don't care about ad tracking or profiling. Nobody in real life complains about it. They get it that "free" means ad tracking. People care very much about making good decisions so they will be careful about blindly trusting the output of a machine.