This may be out of date but in this video by Lawful Masses lawyers are concerned that software AI tools which somehow (I don’t recall) help them understand a case. This issue is the AI should not use information sourced from another client’s confidential case/documents to inform them about another case but they don’t know how it works. Responses from Microsoft were not forthcoming.

I would argue they can’t know unless they have access to the source code to verify what any (local) AI can do (not personally do it, but a trusted 3rd party audit which isn’t behind closed doors).

Consider that a program can edit the file while running at any point, not merely during user input. Like a virus with access to user’s files it could even edit a document that’s not even being displayed to the user on the screen.

Also no, you don’t know what it’s doing so you could be blindsighted by the latest AI update making unexpected changes. Not only from good-intentioned features but also bugs, or malicious anti-features after the CEO throws their toys out of the Twitter pram.

Creating text is not the only issue, it may be trained from your confidential files.

To really be sure would require knowing what software is actually doing - not just taking the claims made by the programmers (or more likely, the mere owners) of the proprietary software.

That sounds doubly difficult job.

Like how the cellular module is proprietary and locked down, even on something like a Librem phone. Or like how DVD players had to use proprietary software to force comply with DRM.

“It’s impossible” is often used not to literally describe a logically impossible event but instead as an exaggeration. “I can’t possibly fathom why” is also not literal, it means under regular circumstances.

I cannot imagine why anyone would prefer grass that cuts your skin over regular grass means for typical people using grass in typical garden/field situations. That could be someone’s person preference but that it’s not typical, it’s unexpected.

There’s a GPL compliance lawsuit where they’re suing NOT as a copyright holder of contrubtor’s code but as a user of the software (a 3rd party beneficiary, under contract law). The GPL was intended to give standing to users of the software, so hopeful this makes presidence.

Google Pain Services

I’d like to blame the voting system for the lack of meaningful voting options.

What is the incentive to do this sort of stuff?

An offsite server is not under your control and accessible by who knows. Surely it is still a privacy concern.

Privacy is like security in that it costs time. Most people don’t spend time on even having a conversation like this but if something bothers you then finding a spare day is easier.

There are many other cameras but most have the same potential to do this sort of shit. Sending video to some server you don’t control, on cameras you don’t control because it’s proprietary, isn’t going to cut it if privacy is your goal.

People who claim they don’t value privacy are simply ignorant of how this can affect them. They don’t consider the data falling into the wrong hands. Surely they don’t want criminals with unauthorized access at least. It should be obvious that governments don’t always have their best interests either.

One master password to rule them all, One server to find them, One password to bring them all, and in the darkness bind them.

Yeah I use 2FA with the master notebook.

I’ve not found anything better. Storing on my computer, or worse someone else’s computer, doesn’t seem safe.

Worse still it’s not even clear what is being discussed. It implied “violence” but that is a wide range from just pushing to serious shooting.

% can also be misleading when a scale is arbitrary. A temperature increase measured in Fahrenheit will be a rather different % when converted to Kelvin.

deleted by creator

I thought this comment would have gone down better. It’s a banger.

In UK you can’t buy high caffeine drinks unless you’re over 16, so you need ID if you don’t look over ~20.