Ditto - no spam at all. I do get reminders that it’s time to file, and conveniently, if nothing has changed since the previous year (address, employer, marital status, etc.) then they can pre-populate the form.
I’m not sure what the solution is here. Personally, in-person college is a non-starter for a number of health reasons. Online classes was a huge boon to people like me, I never would have been able to get a degree otherwise.
I know I’m in a small minority, and this wouldn’t apply to a large number of courses where online classes don’t make sense, but I don’t think the solution is exclusion.
Things like this are generally assumed to be male without a reason to gender them female, like being colored pink or having a bow or hearts drawn on or something. It may be sexist, but it's what people assume.
0? I understood that the plaintiff is what'sapp. Not sure if it's for damages or punitive.
The victims are probably not citizens of the US so they would be outside of this jurisdiction. That's between those two countries. The reason it's going to the US court is because it occured in US cyberturf (Meta's servers)
The risk isn’t that Signal itself will add AI features, it’s more that it will be built-in to your OS that’s running Signal (Apple Intelligence, Windows Recall, etc). These types watch everything you do on-device by default and learn a ton from your E2EE messages regardless of the intentions of the Signal devs.
I would say that in practice that doesn’t seem to be how some of these examples are being architected.
Apple Intelligence as an example only seems to be reading information from Apple’s own default apps as of today, and their developer documentation suggests that capabilities require developers to implement features via their APIs.
It isn’t really a correct read of the situation to say that Apple Intelligence is “watching everything you do” like a service that is just watching your screen output at all times.
Even the service that does do that exact sort of thing (Windows Recall) has an extensive set of controls around filtering out specific apps and private browsing mode and other sensitive information, enabled by default: https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/privacy-and-cont...
So I think the reality is that a lot of the big players making this technology recognize the privacy and security concerns and are designing their AI applications to address those concerns.
I personally feel like AI products are frequently launching with more transparency about data usage than a lot of Web 2.0 era applications like Facebook.
Idk why you’d want to get used to it. I’m very lucky to have a job that doesn’t mandate AI use, and as far as I can tell I haven’t been hit by any work AI emails. My social media bubble on Mastodon is extremely anti-AI, I pretty much never have to deal with slop.
On the rare occasion I see some GPT garbage, I either block the sender, or if I know a human is involved I explain how insulting it is and let them know they’re one slop message away from blocked.
Getting used to it is a surefire way to make your communication experience much worse.
I'm not referring to spam. I'm thinking about how AI-enabled email/messaging/writing actually makes communication clearer. Many people are not very good at expressing themselves in writing, either due to language barriers or simply lack of writing skills, but I've seen a noticeable difference in how some of these people are now able to communicate with me over email. They leverage the LLM as a function to transform their naturally-poor and hard-to-understand writing into a clear, comprehensible message with proper grammar that I can easily consume and immediately understand what they need. The fact that the message has been clearly transcribed by an LLM is completely okay with me.
In what way is knowing the full legal name of a developer relevant to end users? I work in the App Store analytics space and even I have never once thought “I wonder what the full legal name and address of the app developer is. I’d love to drive to their place physically or mail a letter 1800s style to discuss their app”
The most I’d ever wonder about is maybe their country of origin.
For the 1 in 10,000 case of someone actually legitimately suing someone, publicly showing this info to everyone will also create a 100% chance of being sent spam or phishing emails with your real name and country, 1 in 2 chance of some troll signing you up for something nasty, 1 in 50 chance of someone ordering pizza to your house that you have to pay for, 1 in 500 chance of an angry user demanding you add some feature or delete the app else he'll do something bad with your information, 1 in 1000 chance of being SWATted, etc...
If your app is something that's currently politically controversial (e.g. it's an app for trans people), multiply these probabilities by 10.
I didn't make these rules. Just pointing out why this stuff is flowing down hill from government regulations and the overreaction of the private companies who have in the business model no allowance for nuance or human intervention at scale. Make rules so tight that people who are neither paid nor empowered to make decisions can enforce it.
If people don't want to be accountable for their app in any way, maybe they just don't have to have their apps out there. There are other venues, app stores, sideloading, where apps can be put up by random people with no verifiable information and even less trustworthiness than some random app from play store.
F-Droid allows random people with no verifiable information to publish apps, and AFAIK there's never been a single case of malware or something malicious.
The same can't be said about Google Play where I can usually find malware at any time with specific search queries. These are apps that should have never been approved in the first place because they're blatantly impersonating another app.
The people who make this malware won't be accountable, because they don't register their own developer account and verify their own identity. They go around emailing the contact email of every small developer on Google Play, saying that they'll buy their developer profile or pay for them to upload an app. I got many such emails as it is.
Yeah, I wanted to add that it may be less of a problem when there's source code, but sideloading and third party app stores includes apps that don't have source code available, like random loose apks people just download and install, or just third party stores that aren't open source oriented (like game stores, phone maker stores, etc.) Checking source code is also not an option on play store itself, so they might want to have some other ways of verifying where something comes from and letting other people check something for themselves.
“People on the left think this is good because it makes giving social services easier”
Source? I’d like to meet a single person that feels this way. People on the left in my experience would much rather just give money directly to people, UBI-style. Adding stipulations and verification and administration costs so much money that could just be cash in people’s pockets.
Like, the whole idea of food stamps is that “these poor people are too stupid or deviant to spend money on the ‘correct’ products and services. Daddy government knows best and will restrict the benefits to processed cold food at approved chain supermarkets and gas stations”
They don’t spam my email and phone unlike Intuit (even after I deleted my account)