It would definitely be a bit more annoying to program, and a bit more naggy to the user for permissions during setup I'm sure, and running in the background would take some finagling and extra work and iOS could still kill it in the background on you ... but otherwise it'd be the same.
MotoAsh
joined 1 month ago
Apple fans are not that type of person, though. They're better than everyone else, and so is their owning entity! They can do no wrong, this app was obviously guilty of doxxing cops ...
IMO, this kind of amazement mostly points to humans not really unserstanding how tiny the building blocks of reality are. Even the "massive" protein molecules your body uses with hundreds of thousands of atoms in them, tens of thousands of amino acid chains, can fit many on the tip of a sewing needle.
Titin has over 30,000 amino acids in it, and barely gets over 1um in length. That's barely wider than a sharp razor blade's edge, and they're orders of magnitude sharper than most knives.
The scale of the world is crazy, and we are already giants in it.
That won't protect shit. You need laws that actually protect and preserve privacy. Otherwise they'll just find some loophole. Like the NSA in the US. Not supposed to get searched without a warrant to the point where evidence gathered in such ways is supposed to be inadmissable in court... But your data isn't your property.
Even if it were your property, you'd have to add protections so that just because a company handles your data doesn't magically make it their data to sell for profit so it ends up spread far and wide and hackable in dozens of databases around the world.
If you don't protect PRIVACY and your right to control your own data, they'll just say they can force companies to use more hackable methodologies instead of an outright back door. They'll just force government ID to get on the web so even just your comms patterns without the content can be very telling. They could even simply force companies to forward the data some other way after the data legally becomes the company's data...
If you try to protect "from mass surveilance" without understanding the legal avenues in which your data is extracted... you'll just end up making room some other way while innoculating the tech illiterate public from how vulnerable their data still is.
Remember, nobody thought there was mass surveilance in the US until Snowden leaked it... Even then, the tech illiterate do not understand how it is EXACTLY a runaround of the fourth amendment.
What is that? Chicken noodle soup with gelatin crafted in to a jello dog/thing?
Never mind Canada and Mexico I guess.
More like later it turned out God never existed and humanity's attempt at eloquent moral education with fables and parables turned in to a systemic control mechanism that then turned on humanity because its entire purpose was utterly corrupted by the rich and powerful.
Religion itself has already been on the path of destroying shared understanding for centuries. "AI" isn't unique in that regard.
Reminds me of the recent "debates" about not dehumanizing Nazis...
No, you fucking losers, Nazi's do not deserve respect!
If someone's aim is to FUCKING KILL YOU, the last thing I want to hear from self-rightous buffoons is, "but you might hurt their feelings!"
Claiming it's "bad" to call bad things bad because it biases others against that thing... is also fucking dumb tone policing. It's GOOD when bad things have "bad" associated with them!! It's GOOD to call the people that push for bad things also bad... because they ARE bad people.
I dunno', that sounds less than minimum to me. lol When your major life claims of morality still include sexism, something is wrong...
lol no. That's not how fascists think. Intelligence itself is what they hate. They hate anyone smarter than them, espwcially ones that don't immediately reinforce their shitty world views. They're petulant children who happened to become adults, jealous of a happy world because they're incapable of it themselves.
They hate science because it proves there is an objective world out there that doesn't and will never agree with them.
I hear you. I just have to push back against anyone who is clearly assuming certain jobs simply deserve their insanely high paychecks. Virtually nobody should be making The Rock kind of money, and anyone operating on the assumption that it's not only totally fine but should be assumed for some jobs really gets my hackles up.
No, they're pointing out the chilling effect of shitting on the topic.
You're the kind of fuckwit that would say Chris Hansen does no good against predators because he's one guy doing a small set of stings... You're the kind of guy who'd shit on a compromise policy that's otherwise still a step in the right direction. You're the kind of guy to make good the enemy of great.
and you have the gall to use insults when YOU are the one committing the social faux pas...
Pathetic. If you're going to point out flaws, be constructive with it. Otherwise it is still on YOU if someone assumes negative intent from unconstructive criticism.