As it turns out, it’s impossible to remove a user’s data from a trained A.I. model. Deleting the model entirely is also difficult—and there’s little regulation to enforce either option.

I’m rather curious to see how the EU’s privacy laws are going to handle this.

(Original article is from Fortune, but Yahoo Finance doesn’t have a paywall)

  • Primarily0617
    27•1 year ago

    ok i guess you don’t get to use private data in your models too bad so sad

    why does the capitalistic urge to become “the world leader” in whatever technology-of-the-month is popular right now supersede a basic human right to privacy?

    • @[email protected]English
      0•1 year ago

      ok i guess you don’t get to use private data in your models too bad so sad

      You seem to have an assumption that all AI models are intended for the sole benefit of corporations. What about medical models that can predict disease more accurately and more quickly than human doctors? Something like that could be hugely beneficial for society as a whole. Do you think we should just not do it because someone doesn’t like that their data was used to train the model?

      • Primarily0617
        2•1 year ago

        You seem to have an assumption that all AI models are intended for the sole benefit of corporations.

        You seem to have the assumption that they’re not. And that “helping society” is anything more than a happy accident that results from “making big profits”.

        What about medical models

        A pretty big “what if” when every single model that’s been tried for the purpose you suggest so far has either predicted based off the age of a medical imaging scan, or off the doctor’s signature in the corner of one.

        Are you asking me whether it’s a good idea to give up the concept of “Privacy” in return for an image classifier that detects how much film grain there is in a given image?

        • @[email protected]English
          1•1 year ago

          You seem to have the assumption that they’re not. And that “helping society” is anything more than a happy accident that results from “making big profits”.

          It’s not an assumption. There’s academic researchers at universities working on developing these kinds of models as we speak.

          Are you asking me whether it’s a good idea to give up the concept of “Privacy” in return for an image classifier that detects how much film grain there is in a given image?

          I’m not wasting time responding to straw men.

          • Primarily0617
            1•1 year ago

            There’s academic researchers at universities working on developing these kinds of models as we speak.

            Where does the funding for these models come from? Why are they willing to fund those models? And in comparison, why does so little funding go towards research into how to make neural networks more privacy-compatible?

            I’m not wasting time responding to straw men.

            1. Please learn what a straw man argument is
            2. The technology you’re describing doesn’t exist, and likely won’t for a very long time, so all you’re doing is allowing data harvesting en-masse in return for nothing. Your hypothetical would have more teeth if it was anywhere close to being anything but a hypothetical.