Just before a decisive meeting in Brussels, digital rights expert and former Member of the European Parliament Dr. Patrick Breyer is sounding the alarm. Using a "deceptive sleight of hand," a mandatory and expanded Chat Control is being pushed through the back door, in a form even more intrusive tha
I would bet my right nut on the real reason for all this is some AI-billionaire who aggressively pushes this with moneyz. Having every fart we make soon be analyzed by AI is the best “natural” training there could be.
As a cherry on top is the total surveillance for the state(s). AI will probably do a decent job (despite what the article says) in scanning for potential “threats” to let actual people check.
But I can’t even comprehend the power that would be needed to actually scan every shit by every person every minute. No data center in the world has this oomph. So it has to be a simple keyword-search (in all possible languages, even leetspeek and co?) To forward to ai. And if ai would just report 0.5% as “suspicious” for manual human control, it would be more supermassive than a black hole. This is just not doable and hence defeats it’s fake reason: protecting the kids.
So that kinda just leaves ai-training and selective easy surveillances without court-orders. Which also won’t protect kids. As every criminal out there will find a loophole.
Of course, just listen to the CEO of Palantir, he already admitted that that’s his goal. By inference, we can extrapolate that this is the goal of all major business leaders of these companies who are developing AI systems. They need more data to compete with China, and if that requires the West to have authoritarian mass surveillance systems, so be it.
https://gizmodo.com/palantir-ceo-says-a-surveillance-state-is-preferable-to-china-winning-the-ai-race-2000683144
While he’s technically not wrong, i hate the world and where it will continue to go to.
All the current powers that be, private and governmental, can heartily agree that allowing the public to have any expectation of privacy or autonomy is highly undesirable.
Can we please stop circlejerking AI into everything? The chat control has been in debate before AI was mainstream
I had multiple possible reasons. Total surveillance is enough already, the recent aggressive pushing hints towards another added goal.
You’re free to offer YOUR insight. I don’t even hate AI. I like it.
My insight: EU is not interested in training AI for your corporations, neither are personal chats with likely zero accuracy/factuality good training material, neither is sms-style grammar going to improve any existing AI, everything about this is illogical and pretty stupid. It has always been about control, not… training AI lol
Illogical? Chat is not just about sms-style dumb texts. It’s images and videos. Trillions of freshly taken photographs. Those are tremendously valuable. And even if it’d be just text, it’s natural training on people. But it’s also video calls, another incredibly valuable thing.
And sure, the EU has no AI to offer, hence I said “some ai billionaire” or anyone or lobby that wants that shit being pushed hard.
But as it is just a thought of a possibility I might totally be wrong. As if peasants like us would ever be allowed to know.
Again, that is not a good training material. There have been numerous studies on the type of training data we feed and the result of it. This type of content tends to poison the data and lead to equalivent of brainrot for AI’s. This is not very useful data for AI, there are far better sources. Again, seems highly illogical the EU would do all this just to train some shitty AI. Training material should also always be accompanied by context data, which is commonly missing from instant messaging. It’s just too big of a mess.
Fair points. But “just” surveillance? Anyone worth being surveiled sure wouldn’t be so dumb to use WhatsApp or other stupid crap. I’m worthless to surveillance and even I would not be possible to surveil.
Just seems weird that it’s pushed so hard. Surveillance was always a must-have, but why now? The moment it gets voted away it’s back on the table.
Counter-argument: all my drug dealers use whatsapp. Real life is not movies, criminals are rarely tech savvy.