3 ms·
This is the same concern that has been raised about the personal devices (I think one was legit called “friend”?) that sits around your neck or something and ju
by nerdjon 2y ago
This is the same concern that has been raised about the personal devices (I think one was legit called “friend”?) that sits around your neck or something and just… records your day.
It’s super privacy invading since you are sending this data to a third party without someone else’s consent. (Which I mean we have normalized people consenting for someone else with Google so… yeah).
I think if we are talking about about fully local processing the conversation slightly changes. But there is still a major question about accuracy and the ability to have and say things at a meeting without worrying about it making it to someone else.
- 3s 2y agoThe problem too is that while google or the “big players” can be somewhat “trusted” with security, I don’t trust a random third party startup to properly handle this extremely sensitive data. The sheer number of places AI related data is being sent for processing is staggering and unprecedented. For instance, when I program with Cursor, that data is sent to Cursor severs, then to their tooling and analytics third parties, then to the foundation model providers, then gets trained on, etc.
- JohnFen 2y agoTo be honest, I think that The Big Players have shown that they're not much more trustworthy with security than a random third party startup.
- 3s 2y agoI agree. My point was more in terms of surface area. Sending data to a party with a reputation to uphold and resources to do proper data handling is still better than sending data to 10+ parties with little or no reputation and/or resources to implement security measures.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]