3 ms·

You're missing that this is anti-AI activism

by wahnfrieden 6mo ago

pier25 6mo ago
It's not about AI. I'm pretty sure most people wouldn't be ok with eg a calculator app shipping a 4GB word processor.
croes 6mo ago
Maybe it’s pro-browser activism. A browser should render web pages not bring its own AI
- brendoelfrendo 6mo ago
  Yeah, it's already egregious how resource intensive browsing the web can be, between the browser and the content its loading. Why should we just accept that Google will force another performance hit by loading up an AI model as well?
  - account42 6mo ago
    I guess they took all the Chrome RAM usage memes as feature requests.
nvr219 6mo ago
We should be actively anti-AI being part of a web browser just like that though.
- hparadiz 6mo ago
  Please stop assuming everyone thinks like you. If I can replace even something like translate with a local model that's just a single thing, off the top of my head, that could potentially benefit. I see no reason why these experiments should not be taking place.
  - greggoB 6mo ago
    And the reason they can't do something as simple and easy as ask for consent is...?
    - hparadiz 6mo ago
      You provide consent by using the software.
      - J-Kuhn 6mo ago
        You consent by reading this comment.
        bigyabai 6mo ago
        You joke, but that's how all of FAANG sees things: By using Chrome or ChromeOS, you agree to the Google Terms of Service located at https://policies.google.com/terms and these Google Chrome and ChromeOS Additional Terms of Service. https://www.google.com/chrome/terms/ https://www.google.com/chrome/terms/
        hparadiz 6mo ago
        My statement was literal. Legally.
        J-Kuhn 6mo ago
        Still has the same vibe as "she did consent by wearing such a short skirt".
      - skydhash 6mo ago
        Imagine Amazon deciding to take out $1000 from a credit card just because you use it to buy a phone case. Because you "consented" by using their marketplace.
      - greggoB 6mo ago
- easterncalculus 6mo ago
  Sure, but what's the point of obfuscating that? This article is activism. The re-framing of software that you install intentionally being about breaking your 'consent' is ideological and incendiary. It implies that this is evil. It isn't.
- tjansen 6mo ago
  Why? The AI assistance in Chrome dev tools is really useful. And I also use Google AI mode all the time.
detritus 6mo ago
It is? Or is it just a pragmatic dislike?
themafia 6mo ago
We don't have AI. We have language models trained by rapacious companies on copyrighted material with no concern for copyright violations and with a penchant for intentionally anthropomorhizing their models. I'm an anti corporate malfeasance activist. Hacker News and it's underemployed and underpaid user base gets these two confused all the time. I assure you, your tolerance for language models, or your willingness to use them, will have _zero_ impacts on your pay scale in the coming decade. Finally you should be aware that Google markets this addition as an "anti fraud" and "anti spam" feature. They should have to justify that, I shouldn't have to justify my expectations as a consumer.
- wahnfrieden 6mo ago
  It's not a copyright violation if courts have ruled it's not I have no pay scale to worry about, I own the software I build and don't rely on wages
  - themafia 6mo ago
    > It's not a copyright violation if courts have ruled it's not Courts can't rule aprioi on civil issues. I would not expect the current status quo to count for anything. > I own the software I build and don't rely on wages Cool. So now everyone with $200 is your competition. It seems like a fools paradise to me.
  - account42 6mo ago
    It is if we as a society decide it is.
AlexanderHanff 6mo ago
I am a computer scientist and have studied AI for over 30 years, I use AI every single day and I speak all over the world about the responsible and ethical use of AI... not sure how that makes me anti-ai? I am a privacy activist and I strongly object to corporations reaching in to my device, changing the configuration and installing things I never asked for without telling me or requesting my permission. If that makes me anti-ai, then it is a hat I will wear with pride, thanks. If you don't like that the law protects my position as opposed to your's, perhaps you could lobby to have the law changed, just as I have done for the last 20 years to make these laws stronger?

You're missing that this is anti-AI activism

pier25 6mo ago

It's not about AI. I'm pretty sure most people wouldn't be ok with eg a calculator app shipping a 4GB word processor.

croes 6mo ago

Maybe it’s pro-browser activism. A browser should render web pages not bring its own AI

brendoelfrendo 6mo ago
Yeah, it's already egregious how resource intensive browsing the web can be, between the browser and the content its loading. Why should we just accept that Google will force another performance hit by loading up an AI model as well?
- account42 6mo ago
  I guess they took all the Chrome RAM usage memes as feature requests.

nvr219 6mo ago

We should be actively anti-AI being part of a web browser just like that though.

hparadiz 6mo ago
Please stop assuming everyone thinks like you. If I can replace even something like translate with a local model that's just a single thing, off the top of my head, that could potentially benefit. I see no reason why these experiments should not be taking place.
- greggoB 6mo ago
  And the reason they can't do something as simple and easy as ask for consent is...?
  - hparadiz 6mo ago
    You provide consent by using the software.
    - J-Kuhn 6mo ago
      You consent by reading this comment.
      - bigyabai 6mo ago
        You joke, but that's how all of FAANG sees things: By using Chrome or ChromeOS, you agree to the Google Terms of Service located at https://policies.google.com/terms and these Google Chrome and ChromeOS Additional Terms of Service. https://www.google.com/chrome/terms/ https://www.google.com/chrome/terms/
        hparadiz 6mo ago
        My statement was literal. Legally.
        J-Kuhn 6mo ago
        Still has the same vibe as "she did consent by wearing such a short skirt".
    - skydhash 6mo ago
      Imagine Amazon deciding to take out $1000 from a credit card just because you use it to buy a phone case. Because you "consented" by using their marketplace.
    - greggoB 6mo ago
easterncalculus 6mo ago
Sure, but what's the point of obfuscating that? This article is activism. The re-framing of software that you install intentionally being about breaking your 'consent' is ideological and incendiary. It implies that this is evil. It isn't.
tjansen 6mo ago
Why? The AI assistance in Chrome dev tools is really useful. And I also use Google AI mode all the time.

detritus 6mo ago

It is? Or is it just a pragmatic dislike?

themafia 6mo ago

We don't have AI. We have language models trained by rapacious companies on copyrighted material with no concern for copyright violations and with a penchant for intentionally anthropomorhizing their models. I'm an anti corporate malfeasance activist. Hacker News and it's underemployed and underpaid user base gets these two confused all the time. I assure you, your tolerance for language models, or your willingness to use them, will have _zero_ impacts on your pay scale in the coming decade. Finally you should be aware that Google markets this addition as an "anti fraud" and "anti spam" feature. They should have to justify that, I shouldn't have to justify my expectations as a consumer.

wahnfrieden 6mo ago
It's not a copyright violation if courts have ruled it's not I have no pay scale to worry about, I own the software I build and don't rely on wages
- themafia 6mo ago
  > It's not a copyright violation if courts have ruled it's not Courts can't rule aprioi on civil issues. I would not expect the current status quo to count for anything. > I own the software I build and don't rely on wages Cool. So now everyone with $200 is your competition. It seems like a fools paradise to me.
- account42 6mo ago
  It is if we as a society decide it is.

AlexanderHanff 6mo ago

I am a computer scientist and have studied AI for over 30 years, I use AI every single day and I speak all over the world about the responsible and ethical use of AI... not sure how that makes me anti-ai? I am a privacy activist and I strongly object to corporations reaching in to my device, changing the configuration and installing things I never asked for without telling me or requesting my permission. If that makes me anti-ai, then it is a hat I will wear with pride, thanks. If you don't like that the law protects my position as opposed to your's, perhaps you could lobby to have the law changed, just as I have done for the last 20 years to make these laws stronger?