Olives @olives@qoto.org

In this case, I saw a post from an activist, and it didn't contain the relevant context. I'm not in the loop that much for that particular bill.

I mean... Were the anti-LGBT dog-whistles and puritanism not enough of a sign that #Patreon is problematic?

https://www.theverge.com/2018/10/10/17958784/ai-recruiting-tool-bias-amazon-report

"Bias in machine learning can be a problem even for companies with plenty of experience with AI, like Amazon. According to a report from Reuters, the e-commerce giant scrapped an internal project that was trying to use AI to vet job applications after the software consistently downgraded female candidates."

This is an old one but a reminder.

https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/security/toyota-warns-customers-of-data-breach-exposing-personal-financial-info/

"Toyota Financial Services (TFS) is warning customers it suffered a data breach, stating that sensitive personal and financial data was exposed in the attack.

Toyota Financial Services, a subsidiary of Toyota Motor Corporation, is a global entity with a presence in 90% of the markets where Toyota sells its cars, providing auto financing to its customers."

"German news outlet Heise received a sample of the notices sent by Toyota to German customers, informing that the following data has been compromised:

Full name
Residence address
Contract information
Lease-purchase details
IBAN (International Bank Account Number)

This type of data can be used in phishing, social engineering, scams, financial fraud, and even identity theft attempts."

#privacy

https://themarkup.org/privacy/2023/12/12/your-smart-tv-knows-what-youre-watching "smart" TVs spying on people to serve advertisements, and instructions on how apparently to stop that. #privacy

"virtual" is a synonym for "fictional" (not to be confused with "virtual" as in "online"). It can be indicative of someone trying to manipulate you.

The term "virtual" is a less common trick (direct conflation seems more common in recent months) but not unheard of with someone trying to be "smart". It originates from a court case from twenty years ago.

It is also used in a scientific paper from 2008 which came to the conclusion that porn is not linked to abuse.

However, more recently, it is primarily used in apologia for censorship in a non-scholarly setting... So, there it can be used in a tricky manner, where you don't recognize what it truly means.

It's tempting for me to comment on a few "generative AI" cases but I think that the generalized rules of sorts (thousands of words in a post) that I wrote before speak for themselves.

Nice to see more people challenging bad "generative AI" takes (i.e. "someone might generate something offensive" takes).

It's certainly tempting to offer up opinions on a lot of things, lol.

Opposing the expansion of the Patriot Act would be a good idea. Good grief. As if this thing wasn't privacy intrusive, not to mention, unconstitutional, enough, you have people looking to make it even worse.

https://reclaimthenet.org/epic-games-wins-lawsuit-against-googles-app-illegal-monopoly The Google Play App Store is ruled to be a monopoly.

https://reason.com/2023/12/10/how-a-law-no-one-understands-brought-down-florida-drug-kingpins/ Interesting story.

I'm not really fond of the idea of a "detection order" in the chat control, whatever the "scope", really.

If someone is clearly up to something evil, cops have an option to infiltrate, or to shut the place down, as they already do. Even providing evidence that is available (with the problems which come with it) seems less strange than a "detection order".