I'm in the home stretch of my 20+ city book tour for my new novel PICKS AND SHOVELS. Catch me in PDX TOMORROW (June 20) at BARNES AND NOBLE with BUNNIE HUANG and at the TUALATIN public library on SUNDAY (June 22). After that, it's LONDON (July 1) with TRASHFUTURE'S RILEY QUINN and then a big finish in MANCHESTER on July 2.
Back in 2006, AOL tried something incredibly bold and even more incredibly stupid: they dumped a data-set of 20,000,000 "anonymized" search queries from 650,000 users (yes, AOL had a search engine – there used to be lots of search engines!):
The AOL dump was a catastrophe. In an eyeblink, many of the users in the dataset were de-anonymized. The dump revealed personal, intimate and compromising facts about the lives of AOL search users. The AOL dump is notable for many reasons, not least because it jumpstarted the academic and technical discourse about the limits of "de-identifying" datasets by stripping out personally identifying information prior to releasing them for use by business partners, researchers, or the general public.
It turns out that de-identification is fucking hard. Just a couple of datapoints associated with an "anonymous" identifier can be sufficent to de-anonymize the user in question:
But firms stubbornly refuse to learn this lesson. They would love it if they could "safely" sell the data they suck up from our everyday activities, so they declare that they can safely do so, and sell giant data-sets, and then bam, the next thing you know, a federal judge's porn-browsing habits are published for all the world to see:
But that doesn't mean there's no safe way to data-mine large data-sets. "Trusted research environments" (TREs) can allow researchers to run queries against multiple sensitive databases without ever seeing a copy of the data, and good procedural vetting as to the research questions processed by TREs can protect the privacy of the people in the data:
But companies are perennially willing to trade your privacy for a glitzy new product launch. Amazingly, the people who run these companies and design their products seem to have no clue as to how their users use those products. Take Strava, a fitness app that dumped maps of where its users went for runs and revealed a bunch of secret military bases:
Or Venmo, which, by default, let anyone see what payments you've sent and received (researchers have a field day just filtering the Venmo firehose for emojis associated with drug buys like "pills" and "little trees"):
Then there was the time that Etsy decided that it would publish a feed of everything you bought, never once considering that maybe the users buying gigantic handmade dildos shaped like lovecraftian tentacles might not want to advertise their purchase history:
But the most persistent, egregious and consequential sinner here is Facebook (naturally). In 2007, Facebook opted its 20,000,000 users into a new system called "Beacon" that published a public feed of every page you looked at on sites that partnered with Facebook:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Facebook_Beacon
Facebook didn't just publish this – they also lied about it. Then they admitted it and promised to stop, but that was also a lie. They ended up paying $9.5m to settle a lawsuit brought by some of their users, and created a "Digital Trust Foundation" which they funded with another $6.5m. Mark Zuckerberg published a solemn apology and promised that he'd learned his lesson.
Apparently, Zuck is a slow learner.
Depending on which "submit" button you click, Meta's AI chatbot publishes a feed of all the prompts you feed it:
Users are clearly hitting this button without understanding that this means that their intimate, compromising queries are being published in a public feed. Techcrunch's Amanda Silberling trawled the feed and found:
"An audio recording of a man in a Southern accent asking, 'Hey, Meta, why do some farts stink more than other farts?'"
"people ask[ing] for help with tax evasion"
"[whether family members would be arrested for their proximity to white-collar crimes"
"how to write a character reference letter for an employee facing legal troubles, with that person’s first and last name included."
While the security researcher Rachel Tobac found "people’s home addresses and sensitive court details, among other private information":
There's no warning about the privacy settings for your AI prompts, and if you use Meta's AI to log in to Meta services like Instagram, it publishes your Instagram search queries as well, including "big booty women."
As Silberling writes, the only saving grace here is that almost no one is using Meta's AI app. The company has only racked up a paltry 6.5m downloads, across its ~3 billion users, after spending tens of billions of dollars developing the app and its underlying technology.
The AI bubble is overdue for a pop:
https://www.wheresyoured.at/measures/
When it does, it will leave behind some kind of residue – cheaper, spin-out, standalone models that will perform many useful functions:
Those standalone models were released as toys by the companies pumping tens of billions into the unsustainable "foundation models," who bet that – despite the worst unit economics of any technology in living memory – these tools would someday become economically viable, capturing a winner-take-all market with trillions of upside. That bet remains a longshot, but the littler "toy" models are beating everyone's expectations by wide margins, with no end in sight:
I can easily believe that one enduring use-case for chatbots is as a kind of enhanced diary-cum-therapist. Journalling is a well-regarded therapeutic tactic:
https://www.charliehealth.com/post/cbt-journaling
And the invention of chatbots was instantly followed by ardent fans who found that the benefits of writing out their thoughts were magnified by even primitive responses:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ELIZA_effect
Which shouldn't surprise us. After all, divination tools, from the I Ching to tarot to Brian Eno and Peter Schmidt's Oblique Strategies deck have been with us for thousands of years: even random responses can make us better thinkers:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oblique_Strategies
I make daily, extensive use of my own weird form of random divination:
https://pluralistic.net/2022/07/31/divination/
The use of chatbots as therapists is not without its risks. Chatbots can – and do – lead vulnerable people into extensive, dangerous, delusional, life-destroying ratholes:
But that's a (disturbing and tragic) minority. A journal that responds to your thoughts with bland, probing prompts would doubtless help many people with their own private reflections. The keyword here, though, is private. Zuckerberg's insatiable, all-annihilating drive to expose our private activities as an attention-harvesting spectacle is poisoning the well, and he's far from alone. The entire AI chatbot sector is so surveillance-crazed that anyone who uses an AI chatbot as a therapist needs their head examined:
AI bosses are the latest and worst offenders in a long and bloody lineage of privacy-hating tech bros. No one should ever, ever, ever trust them with any private or sensitive information. Take Sam Altman, a man whose products routinely barf up the most ghastly privacy invasions imaginable, a completely foreseeable consequence of his totally indiscriminate scraping for training data.
Altman has proposed that conversations with chatbots should be protected with a new kind of "privilege" akin to attorney-client privilege and related forms, such as doctor-patient and confessor-penitent privilege:
I'm all for adding new privacy protections for the things we key or speak into information-retrieval services of all types. But Altman is (deliberately) omitting a key aspect of all forms of privilege: they immediately vanish the instant a third party is brought into the conversation. The things you tell your lawyer are priviiliged, unless you discuss them with anyone else, in which case, the privilege disappears.
And of course, all of Altman's products harvest all of our information. Altman is the untrusted third party in every conversation everyone has with one of his chatbots. He is the eternal Carol, forever eavesdropping on Alice and Bob:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alice_and_Bob
Altman isn't proposing that chatbots acquire a privilege, in other words – he's proposing that he should acquire this privilege. That he (and he alone) should be able to mine your queries for new training data and other surveillance bounties.
This is like when Zuckerberg directed his lawyers to destroy NYU's "Ad Observer" project, which scraped Facebook to track the spread of paid political misinformation. Zuckerberg denied that this was being done to evade accountability, insisting (with a miraculously straight face) that it was in service to protecting Facebook users' (nonexistent) privacy:
If you'd like an essay-formatted version of this post to read or share, here's a link to it on pluralistic.net, my surveillance-free, ad-free, tracker-free blog:
Days Gone: How to Find the NERO Beacon in White King Mine
New Post has been published on https://videogaming.newonline.help/days-gone-how-to-find-the-nero-beacon-in-white-king-mine/
Days Gone: How to Find the NERO Beacon in White King Mine
This is a fairly hidden location since you won’t pass by here through story missions or jobs. You can either discover this location on foot or after liberating the …
source super cheats
Mark Zuckerberg, pervasive May 14, 1984, was a Harvard undergraduate however he started the Facebook state networking website. An early fan on computers who had full a "bantering" mp3 player in high school, Zuckerberg had previously been reprimanded by the Harvard board of directors for his Facemash site, a Harvard-specific photo rating site that operated like HotOrNot.com but used photographs taken from Harvard's online facebook, without the subjects' affirmative voice. (A facebook, lower-case, is a collection of humanist photographs designed in passage to put in students so each other.)<\p>
In February of 2004, he started "The Facebook," which took the goals of those lower-case traditional facebooks and combined you with the companionable networking of Myspace-like sites. Unlike Facemash, The Facebook was opt-in -- any Harvard student could create an record, and abreast the lot in point of the month, more than half of the undergraduates had done so. Zuckerberg expanded the military quickly, offering it to all Ivy Clap together schools thanks to the end of the spring and more schools the following semester. The Wirehog abode was created as a companion filesharing haunt because Facebook users, and by the end pertaining to 2004, The Facebook had over one myriad written down users.<\p>
The advertising revenue on top it easier versus raise venture pecuniary, and Zuckerberg and his associates purchased the facebook.com domain from its previous holder and dropped the "The" from the site's name. Again time, Facebook became more and then inclusive, opening its doors in contemplation of all two-year college students, absolute power members, and alumni (anyone with a confirmed educational-domain email address), and in 2006 added networks for high school students. Since fall of 2006, the site has been open to anyone who wishes to join -- a shift aloof from the student-centric origins which many users have decried.
<\p>
Interim, a Craigslist-like Facebook Marketplace has been added in passage to the site, along with a soapbox for offering applications. Microsoft purchased a 1.6% stake opening the company for $240 million in October of 2007, and the piscatory month the Facebook Beacon service premiered -- a controversial initiative that blends the marketplace and social networking, which has come under considerable criticism in favor of the way that it can broadcast bringing to book about a user's activity outside in connection with the Facebook location, saving adequately remonstrative the power structure.<\p>
Zuckerberg moved to Palo Diva to take Facebook slap time, taking a default as regards absence from Harvard; the Facebook offices now occupy four downtown buildings.<\p>
Facebook, popüler sayfa sahiplerine sayfalarını tanıtmak için, yeni bir projeye ortaya çıktı. “Facebook Bluetooth Beacon” isminde yeni bir cihaz çıkartan Facebook bu cihaz ile popüler sayfa sahiplerinin firmalarına gelen kullanıcılara tek yönlü bir bluetooth sinyali gönderiyor. Bu sayede ise mekanları ziyaret eden kullanıcılar, Facebook üzerinden daha isabetli şekilde buraya ait bilgiler…
Watchmojo.com collected 10 best (according to them) marketing failures. While some are really sloppy (and they should not be in the Top 10), others are pretty hilarious.
SPOILER ALERT. BETTER WATCH THE VIDEO FIRST BEFORE YOU CONTINUE READING THIS.
My favorites in this video are Mcdonald’s, New Coke. The absolute winner is AYDS. Poor guys, I bet they were working hard on that brand and *bam* - suddenly it is pronounced the same way as one of the most terrifying newly-discovered diseases. *apply Bad Luck Brian Meme here*
Follow Marketing Shmarketing on Facebook, Twitter, Google plus.
They seemed like such good ideas… At the time. Not every marketing campaign can be a success, but it takes a special kind of ad to fail as spectacularly as these. Whether they’re creeping out audiences, offending special interest groups, losing money for their businesses or are just plain weird, these marketing choices have been some of the worst in…
