3 ms·

One reddit comment in opposition to this idea I agreed with was "If Google turned on an LLM tomorrow that had access to your whole text message history, locati

by mentos 3y ago

One reddit comment in opposition to this idea I agreed with was "If Google turned on an LLM tomorrow that had access to your whole text message history, location history, calendar, google docs & drive, and all of your gmail (sent and received), almost everyone would start using it and keep using it." https://old.reddit.com/r/LocalLLaMA/comments/16au3ga/im_convinced_now_that_personal_llms_are_going_to/jzbwsrr/ https://old.reddit.com/r/LocalLLaMA/comments/16au3ga/im_conv...

unixhero 3y ago
So then all we need is Charlize Theron's voice in an all voice command world, and were there where Her brought us. The future came faster than I thought
sublinear 3y ago
I think the public opinion of LLMs is so severely damaged right now that if Google made that available tomorrow it would be a media circus of bad incidents, experts, and even politicians chiming in. That the public has a poor understanding of technology cuts both ways. There's no such thing as user error if they're talking to an LLM. High expectations require high amounts of testing, regulation, etc.
myth_drannon 3y ago
that's multiple orders of magnitude more training data, I don't think it makes sense financialy (or possible in the near future).
totallywrong 3y ago
That's both very true and very sad.
throw7 3y ago
Users will get one wrong answer at a critical time and then google will shut it down. Actually, they'll probably just shut it down after a couple of years.
- barryrandall 3y ago
  If that was true, Google Assistant would have been archived years ago.
dragonwriter 3y ago
You mean if Google Assistant was backed by an LLM instead of whatever combination of tools is backing it now? Yes, 100% this is correct. And its been fairly overtly the direction Google’s AI efforts have been directed at since long before “LLM” was the an implementation technology they could use for it. If Google was any good at productizing its AI efforts, it would already have happened.
russellbeattie 3y ago
Here's a fundamental truth that HNers can't or won't accept: Consumers don't care about privacy, at all. Maybe conceptually, they might object to Big Tech knowing as much as they do, but it doesn't affect their decisions in any way. They simply don't care that Google Maps is always tracking their location, that an Echo Show has a camera and mic that can be remotely activated, that TikTok is logging their viewing habits down to the millisecond, nor that their Smart TVs are logging their media choices. They just don't care. It doesn't affect their willingness to use or buy technology in the slightest. The comment you quoted and your agreement shows this quite plainly. This actually bodes well for AI services, as they will be more useful the more they know about you. Your age, gender, sexual preferences, religion, work, family, possessions, money, tax records, account logins, schedule, habits, health records, etc. will help AIs to help you. This is the inevitable end game for AI services, so the fact that your average joe has no real conviction about privacy will hasten that future. Side note: If your business or product plan includes "privacy" as one of its core features, expect limited success as you're targeting a very niche part of the market. No one cares.
- Yizahi 3y ago
  Humans can tolerate increasing amounts of discomfort as long as it's incremented slowly or alternatives are blocked. Privacy loss is simply one of the many discomforts which we tolerate. Which is why pointing a flaw in any long used product of service causes such antagonistic reaction - that flaw was already normalized by us.

by mentos 3y ago

unixhero 3y ago

So then all we need is Charlize Theron's voice in an all voice command world, and were there where Her brought us. The future came faster than I thought

sublinear 3y ago

I think the public opinion of LLMs is so severely damaged right now that if Google made that available tomorrow it would be a media circus of bad incidents, experts, and even politicians chiming in. That the public has a poor understanding of technology cuts both ways. There's no such thing as user error if they're talking to an LLM. High expectations require high amounts of testing, regulation, etc.

myth_drannon 3y ago

that's multiple orders of magnitude more training data, I don't think it makes sense financialy (or possible in the near future).

totallywrong 3y ago

That's both very true and very sad.

throw7 3y ago

Users will get one wrong answer at a critical time and then google will shut it down. Actually, they'll probably just shut it down after a couple of years.

barryrandall 3y ago
If that was true, Google Assistant would have been archived years ago.

dragonwriter 3y ago

You mean if Google Assistant was backed by an LLM instead of whatever combination of tools is backing it now? Yes, 100% this is correct. And its been fairly overtly the direction Google’s AI efforts have been directed at since long before “LLM” was the an implementation technology they could use for it. If Google was any good at productizing its AI efforts, it would already have happened.

russellbeattie 3y ago

Here's a fundamental truth that HNers can't or won't accept: Consumers don't care about privacy, at all. Maybe conceptually, they might object to Big Tech knowing as much as they do, but it doesn't affect their decisions in any way. They simply don't care that Google Maps is always tracking their location, that an Echo Show has a camera and mic that can be remotely activated, that TikTok is logging their viewing habits down to the millisecond, nor that their Smart TVs are logging their media choices. They just don't care. It doesn't affect their willingness to use or buy technology in the slightest. The comment you quoted and your agreement shows this quite plainly. This actually bodes well for AI services, as they will be more useful the more they know about you. Your age, gender, sexual preferences, religion, work, family, possessions, money, tax records, account logins, schedule, habits, health records, etc. will help AIs to help you. This is the inevitable end game for AI services, so the fact that your average joe has no real conviction about privacy will hasten that future. Side note: If your business or product plan includes "privacy" as one of its core features, expect limited success as you're targeting a very niche part of the market. No one cares.

Yizahi 3y ago
Humans can tolerate increasing amounts of discomfort as long as it's incremented slowly or alternatives are blocked. Privacy loss is simply one of the many discomforts which we tolerate. Which is why pointing a flaw in any long used product of service causes such antagonistic reaction - that flaw was already normalized by us.