The problem is democracy and capitalism are incompatible, so that "if" is doing some really heavy lifting.

Why are they incompatible? They’ve been operating together for hundreds of years.

I think rather than "incompatible" the issue lies in equality/equity. Too many people are being manipulated.

> Surely this would be illegal? Personal data without consent?

I'm not trying to be mean here, but have you been frozen in ice for the last 20 years? This is effectively the tech industry's raison d'etre.

Yeah, I staunchly refuse to believe an ad company that releases a closed-source browser would violate our privacy. You're probably right that they changed the claim simply because it was too verbose. That's the best and only explanation.

> My belief is that the AI business is all about data collection.

In the short term, maybe. That's what you tell investors.

In the long term, it's about altering, shaping, and even constructing reality: making a new and canonical truth for humanity where the ruling classes are invisible to us and the machine that tells us our history and bedtime stories and how we feel is in every device we carry, until it is everywhere, and it has always been everywhere, and it will always be everywhere.

> Politicians try to square those competing wills.

Yeah! They're doing their best! They definitely aren't fascist stooges trying to expand the surveillance state.

Odd point to raise in a thread about a family killed while waiting at a bus stop in broad daylight. Do you think reflective clothing would have changed the outcome of the event significantly?

While you were studying the blade, I was drooling on my physical self while trying to get two girls to kiss in a lucid dream.

Yes, "new research" is a misnomer here. The correct version is "people in lab coats have finally noticed ..."

Reminds me of the studies that say lobsters can feel pain. Like, no fucking shit. What multi-cellular (and even single-celled) organisms do not feel pain? Glad we're giving the western stamp of approval on these highly contested ideas.

I suggest you should drop the patronizing tone. People believe lots of things and a lot of them is completely bogus. That's why we need people in lab coats to evaluate them in systematic way.

Such a difficult resource to find.

Or maybe that people are wearing surveillance glasses while they fuck their partner? I know we need to push these companies to not be shitheads, but ultimately you can only be a shithead with the data people give to you (with the exception of things like Flock, who are shitheads with "public" surveillance data).

I know our culture is so supremely fucked at this point that wearing corporate surveillance goggles during intimate moments could somehow be normalized, but holy shit. How did people get so trusting?

People upload videos of themselves having sex for anyone to see. Some people just don’t care about privacy the way you do.

well, this seems kinda like victim blaming, like when a bunch of celebrity phones got hacked and their nudes leaked to the public. Those were supposed to be for personal consumption/partners' eyes only, but they ended up on the web because some assholes decided the whole world was entitled to those photos. like, should those celebrities have uploaded their intimate photos the the cloud? probably not, but it doesn't mean that Google or Apple should be able to do whatever they want with those photos.

but i do agree that people just have become too trusting with our tech overlords, and its that trust that makes them continue to do shit like this over and over.

People make porn. You look down on them. News at 11.