Which has really only been accepted because 99% of people don’t understand how it works. Hard to be outraged by something you can’t see or understand. In my book, the practice is akin to malware. I recently opened a website for an AI service in incognito mode, because I didn’t care to have it in my search results. Despite avoiding third party cookies here, the site still fired off a tracker to Meta, who then correlated my home IP address with my Facebook account, and filled my feed with ads for this AI service. When I was tracked like this despite a somewhat informed defense, which defense do normal people have against this? None.
replySimilar, yes, but some people are paying OpenAI to be part of this business model, unlike typical free-riding Google and Facebook users.
replyIf you pay OpenAI full price, this machinery should never be used. The only paying customers getting ads are the “ad supported” tier.
replyI think you can easily imagine a future where the subscription model token subsidy ramps down and is replaced by ads, but it’s important to use precise language about the current state of the world.
Derogatory "Free-riding users". "Free riding users" should have the same privacy as the paying ones.
replyWill the government pay OpenAI to run an ad-free free tier?
replyThe government could pass laws that prevent advertising becoming mass surveillance and stalking.
replyAds don't require pervasive and invasive tracking, and surveillance that Stasi would have wet dreams about.
replyKind of silly. You have to pay somehow. Either pony up cash or pay with your eyeballs or data. But I doubt paying will give you privacy either.
replydeleted
replyYes. But there is no surprise given that OpenAI hired lots of ex-Meta and Google employees for that reason.
replyhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whataboutism
replyThe fact that others do the same doesn’t make any of the cases excusable.