8 ms·

One of my core followers named Bruno basically said the same thing under my Linkedin post yesterday: https://www.linkedin.com/posts/organic-growth_deepseek-the

One of my core followers named Bruno basically said the same thing under my Linkedin post yesterday: https://www.linkedin.com/posts/organic-growth_deepseek-the-only-takeaway-is-that-open-source-activity-7290017080458846208-hCyn https://www.linkedin.com/posts/organic-growth_deepseek-the-o... I welcome friction, so I'll be blunt: I disagree with you, not because what you are saying is wrong but because you only consider systematic data collection. That's not the issue here. There's a difference between democracies like the United States or European countries, no matter how IMPERFECT they are, and a dictatorship that does not allow dissenting opinions. There's a difference in how the data collected will be used. Freedom of speech, even when it is relative, is better than totalitarianism.

ryanobjc 2y ago
It’s also important to recognize that the Chinese government is known to walk into internet service companies and demand they censor, alter data, delete things. No court order or search warrant required. China considers industry to be completely subservient to government. Checks and balances are secondary to ideas like harmony and collective well being.
- semking 2y ago
  Thank you for this balanced and essential comment which is entirely true!
gruez 2y ago
>There's a difference between democracies like the United States or European countries, no matter how IMPERFECT they are, and a dictatorship that does not allow dissenting opinions. >There's a difference in how the data collected will be used. >Freedom of speech, even when it is relative, is better than totalitarianism. I don't disagree with "democracy is better than totalitarianism", but what does that have to do with collecting device information and IP addresses? Is that excuse a cudgel you can use against any behavior that would otherwise be innocuous? It's fine to be against deepseek because you're concerned about them getting sensitive data via queries, or even that their models be a backdoor to project chinese soft power, but hand wringing about device information and IP addresses is absurd. It makes as much sense as being concerned that the CCP/deepseek does meetings, because even though every other companies does meetings, CCP/deepseek meetings could be used for totalitarianism.
- semking 2y ago
  I don't disagree with you either and like you, I'm entirely against privacy violations in any way, shape or form. I admit I am concerned when I see blatant algorithmic manipulation of social platforms to favor any narrative that aligns with geopolitical objectives. I also wrote about the TikTok algo a few days ago. You'll see what I think of user privacy violations (closed ecosystem + basically a keylogger in this case): https://semking.com/likes-lies-untold-story-tiktok-algorithm/ https://semking.com/likes-lies-untold-story-tiktok-algorithm... I cannot stand when dissenting voices or opinions are shadow-banned. And I have the same opinion regarding U.S. or EU companies. Our privacy should be respected. In the meantime: strong encryption at every corner, please!
  - pphysch 2y ago
    > I admit I am concerned when I see blatant algorithmic manipulation of social platforms to favor any narrative that aligns with geopolitical objectives. I'm curious how robust this principle is for you, because China and Russia are not the first countries that come to mind when talking about the (actual, existing, documented) manipulation of US speech and media by a foreign government. Yet it seems we can only have this discussion, ironically, when the subject is a US government-approved one like China. Anything else would be problematic and unsafe.
    - semking 2y ago
      I don't want to get into politics but I'll gladly admit human beings are biased. "We Don't See Things As They Are, We See Them As We Are" — Samuel b. Nahmani
  - gruez 2y ago
    >I'm entirely against privacy violations in any way, shape or form. >Our privacy should be respected. Characterizing device information and IP addresses as "privacy violations" is a stretch. If you showed a history railing against this sort of stuff, agnostic of geopolitical alignment, then you get a pass, but I think it's fair to assume the converse until proven otherwise. >In the meantime: strong encryption at every corner, please! Irrelevant. The data collection is done by first parties. Encryption doesn't do anything. >I admit I am concerned when I see blatant algorithmic manipulation of social platforms to favor any narrative that aligns with geopolitical objectives. >I cannot stand when dissenting voices or opinions are shadow-banned. What does this have to do with privacy? Again, it's fine to be against "blatant algorithmic manipulation of social platforms" or whatever, but dragging seemingly unrelated topics in an attempt to amass as big pile of greviances as possible is disingenuous. >I also wrote about the TikTok algo a few days ago. You'll see what I think of user privacy violations (closed ecosystem + basically a keylogger in this case): >https://semking.com/likes-lies-untold-story-tiktok-algorithm https://semking.com/likes-lies-untold-story-tiktok-algorithm... Where's the keylogging? I skimmed the article and the only thing I could find was a passing mention about an article that you "was advised not to publish it and I didn’t". How much keylogging could possibly going on in a short video app? Is the "keylogging" just a way to make "we measure how engaged someone is with a video" as sinister as possible?
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
ziddoap 2y ago
>There's a difference in how the data collected will be used. Not that we could ever see what the NSA, CISA, ASIS, GCHQ, and other 3/4-letter agencies are actually doing with the collected data. But they pinky promised to use it properly (or something), so, yay.
r00fus 2y ago
Amusing Bruno seems to think in terms of labels when the reality is that the USA imprisons far more people per capita, and blatantly disregards its so-called "core freedoms" (ie, Bill of Rights) for its citizens very often. This kind of person has a lot of cognitive dissonance going on.

ryanobjc 2y ago

It’s also important to recognize that the Chinese government is known to walk into internet service companies and demand they censor, alter data, delete things. No court order or search warrant required. China considers industry to be completely subservient to government. Checks and balances are secondary to ideas like harmony and collective well being.

semking 2y ago
Thank you for this balanced and essential comment which is entirely true!

gruez 2y ago

>There's a difference between democracies like the United States or European countries, no matter how IMPERFECT they are, and a dictatorship that does not allow dissenting opinions. >There's a difference in how the data collected will be used. >Freedom of speech, even when it is relative, is better than totalitarianism. I don't disagree with "democracy is better than totalitarianism", but what does that have to do with collecting device information and IP addresses? Is that excuse a cudgel you can use against any behavior that would otherwise be innocuous? It's fine to be against deepseek because you're concerned about them getting sensitive data via queries, or even that their models be a backdoor to project chinese soft power, but hand wringing about device information and IP addresses is absurd. It makes as much sense as being concerned that the CCP/deepseek does meetings, because even though every other companies does meetings, CCP/deepseek meetings could be used for totalitarianism.

semking 2y ago
I don't disagree with you either and like you, I'm entirely against privacy violations in any way, shape or form. I admit I am concerned when I see blatant algorithmic manipulation of social platforms to favor any narrative that aligns with geopolitical objectives. I also wrote about the TikTok algo a few days ago. You'll see what I think of user privacy violations (closed ecosystem + basically a keylogger in this case): https://semking.com/likes-lies-untold-story-tiktok-algorithm/ https://semking.com/likes-lies-untold-story-tiktok-algorithm... I cannot stand when dissenting voices or opinions are shadow-banned. And I have the same opinion regarding U.S. or EU companies. Our privacy should be respected. In the meantime: strong encryption at every corner, please!
- pphysch 2y ago
  > I admit I am concerned when I see blatant algorithmic manipulation of social platforms to favor any narrative that aligns with geopolitical objectives. I'm curious how robust this principle is for you, because China and Russia are not the first countries that come to mind when talking about the (actual, existing, documented) manipulation of US speech and media by a foreign government. Yet it seems we can only have this discussion, ironically, when the subject is a US government-approved one like China. Anything else would be problematic and unsafe.
  - semking 2y ago
    I don't want to get into politics but I'll gladly admit human beings are biased. "We Don't See Things As They Are, We See Them As We Are" — Samuel b. Nahmani
- gruez 2y ago
  >I'm entirely against privacy violations in any way, shape or form. >Our privacy should be respected. Characterizing device information and IP addresses as "privacy violations" is a stretch. If you showed a history railing against this sort of stuff, agnostic of geopolitical alignment, then you get a pass, but I think it's fair to assume the converse until proven otherwise. >In the meantime: strong encryption at every corner, please! Irrelevant. The data collection is done by first parties. Encryption doesn't do anything. >I admit I am concerned when I see blatant algorithmic manipulation of social platforms to favor any narrative that aligns with geopolitical objectives. >I cannot stand when dissenting voices or opinions are shadow-banned. What does this have to do with privacy? Again, it's fine to be against "blatant algorithmic manipulation of social platforms" or whatever, but dragging seemingly unrelated topics in an attempt to amass as big pile of greviances as possible is disingenuous. >I also wrote about the TikTok algo a few days ago. You'll see what I think of user privacy violations (closed ecosystem + basically a keylogger in this case): >https://semking.com/likes-lies-untold-story-tiktok-algorithm https://semking.com/likes-lies-untold-story-tiktok-algorithm... Where's the keylogging? I skimmed the article and the only thing I could find was a passing mention about an article that you "was advised not to publish it and I didn’t". How much keylogging could possibly going on in a short video app? Is the "keylogging" just a way to make "we measure how engaged someone is with a video" as sinister as possible?

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

ziddoap 2y ago

>There's a difference in how the data collected will be used. Not that we could ever see what the NSA, CISA, ASIS, GCHQ, and other 3/4-letter agencies are actually doing with the collected data. But they pinky promised to use it properly (or something), so, yay.

r00fus 2y ago

Amusing Bruno seems to think in terms of labels when the reality is that the USA imprisons far more people per capita, and blatantly disregards its so-called "core freedoms" (ie, Bill of Rights) for its citizens very often. This kind of person has a lot of cognitive dissonance going on.