Technology

42829 readers

387 users here now

A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.

Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.

Subcommunities on Beehaw:

This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 4 years ago

MODERATORS

remington@beehaw.org

alyaza@beehaw.org

TheRtRevKaiser@beehaw.org

gyrfalcon@beehaw.org

rs5th@beehaw.org

coldredlight@beehaw.org

SemioticStandard@beehaw.org

The hidden cost of Google's AI defaults and the illusion of choice (arstechnica.com)

submitted 1 hour ago by Powderhorn@beehaw.org to c/technology@beehaw.org

6 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Many people are hoping—nay, praying—that the potential AI bubble will burst soon.

But to hear Google tell it, generative AI is the future, and the company’s products have to change to keep up with the technical reality. As a result, Gemini is seeping into every nook and cranny of the Google ecosystem. Generative AI feeds on data, and Google has a lot of your data in products like Gmail and Drive. What does that mean for your privacy, and what happens if you don’t want Gemini peeking over your shoulder? Well, it’s kind of a mess.

The amount of data Gemini retains depends on how you access the AI, and opting out of data collection can mean running straight into so-called “dark patterns,” UI elements that work against the user’s interest.

This is the future?

top 6 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] Steve@communick.news 4 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 31 minutes ago) (1 children)

Many people are hoping—nay, praying—that the potential AI bubble will burst soon.

But to hear Google tell it, generative AI is the future,

Both of those are true.
In the late 90s the internet was a bubble.
In the 1800s railroads were a bubble.

All new transformative technology goes through an initial bubble phase. People recognize it's potential before that it's fully understood. They over invest for a time, realise they were doing it wrong, the boubble pops, a few remain, and the transformative tech is figures out and changes everything.

[–] XLE@piefed.social 2 points 54 minutes ago* (last edited 35 minutes ago) (1 children)

Apples to oranges fallacy.

Railroad infrastructure and dark fiber brought long-term post-bubble value. Rapidly deprecating GPUs are not.

[–] Steve@communick.news 1 points 39 minutes ago* (last edited 36 minutes ago) (1 children)

That difference doesn't matter to my point.
They were still transformative technologies that started as bubbles.

[–] XLE@piefed.social 1 points 28 minutes ago (1 children)

It matters a great deal if you want to argue AI is more than a bubble by actually saying anything concrete, anything more than implications.

You can't just say "look at these other bubbles, ignore the glaring differences, and assume this will be the same" without having a damn good reason why. Let alone implying something is transformative (or to be concrete: transformative in a way that remotely justifies money wasted so far).

AI companies like NVIDIA look more like Enron than the Web writ large.

[–] Steve@communick.news 1 points 16 minutes ago* (last edited 4 minutes ago) (1 children)

But implications are all I need.
It's either transformative or a fad.
It's already transformed media, education, advertising, politics, and more.
Do you think once the bubble pops, AI will just disappear like Pogs?
Even when the datacenters go dark, the tech will still be here, still be used. Eventually it will find its natural place in a new world.

I'm not saying it's not a bubble. It absolutely is. Everything you're saying is true. It will fall, and hard. I've put 10s of thousands of dollars on it being soon. But after the dust clears AI will still be used, and has already changed the world. How much more it'll change is the only question.

[–] XLE@piefed.social 1 points 4 minutes ago

You appear to have missed the part where I asked you to be concrete and justify whether it's worth the investment.

Vague talk of "change" and "transformation" mean nothing. Sure, it "changed" the level of poison in the atmosphere over communities in Tennessee.