Originally Posted by Asmodian
If a website was tracking you in the 90s you wouldn't have known about it and it would have been perfectly legal. I really do not see how privacy protection can be argued to be worse today. We should probably do something to regulate it, similar to phone and mail, but I do not see how the first decade of the Internet can be thought of as "the good ol' days" with regards to Internet privacy.
Bottom line, the US, China, and Russia are all in a cold war to develop AI first and make it the best AI. The more data they feed AI, the faster it can grow. There is a lot of debate about how AI should be used, if it should be allowed to run autonomous weapons, etc. There's been very little discussion on how to build a moral compass of AI and just what that means for society. Tim Cook is advocating that we should build a moral compass for AI that includes respecting privacy. If we stop and build a compass, our AI may develop slower and other countries may use their AI to exploit others. No doubt, AI will need a moral compass at some point or it poses a significant risk to society. That development part will probably happen as AI transitions out of the narrow field into widespread use. If it doesn't, society is probably screwed.
The reason AI isn't mainstream; there's a lot of overlap between private and public uses. AI that can sort your photos for you can also be used to categorize satellite images. AI that can tag photos with facial reorganization can be used for target identification on weapon systems. As long as their are nations we don't want to have this technology, it cannot be available to the masses. The age of AI is already here, we just don't see it yet.
Originally Posted by looniam
ah, thats a long line of fallacious reasoning.
if someone came and took your ball; would you never of had a ball? does it then cease to exist? so you should always expect someone to steal your ball?
no, not everyone obeys laws and regulations however, that does not dictate to give up the principles they protect. its what a society with its values, norms and mores will allow or tolerate
I would have had a ball that got stolen, which means I wouldn't have a ball anymore. If I bought another ball, I would understand that it too can be stolen. I may take precautions, such as writing my name on the ball and taking it home instead of leaving it by the court.
Principles do not offer protection. I would never steal a bike, but that didn't prevent someone from stealing mine off my front porch. I always lock my bikes now.
The best route is educating people to the possible outcomes and teaching them how to protect themselves. We should always strive to have principles, but we should never assume that someone else shares those principles.