But it naturally skews the results, especially when baby boomers and gen X alone constitute 57% of all respondents: which are typically less digitally literate, and therefore even less considerate of downstream consequences. Am I missing something? Because I cannot find any reference to another study, if that is what you mean. I've seen my share of pseudo studies that governments desperately cling onto, and by all means, this appears to be another one of them.
PierceTheBubble
joined 7 months ago
The statistics appear to originate from from this pseudo study. All of the questions related to supposed "protection of children", are framed within this context, without concretely considering the possible downsides; which strongly biases participants' views. I also like how it typically reduces ages 18-54 to a single bracket (while statistics on page 18, demonstrating a trend of younger respondents, responding with reduced strength), and especially how it doesn't consider minors to be Canadians (18- being asked absolutely nothing, at all...).
I despise Alex Karp and Palantir, but this feels like a pathetic attempt to discredit him, for reasonably throwing shade on grossly over-valued AI products, unsuitable within the context of critical infrastructure and enterprise. His Berkeley faculty member argument simply seems to be an analogy, for other models being capable of performing the task, but it simply not going to happen in his belief. This article appears to serve stakeholders of the AI bubble.
Got to keep shoveling that minimum viable product slop, but heaven forbid a label which might serve as an indication for it.
Yeah, maybe in a different context, as in a scuffed AI-slop The Onion clone haha.
that asserts a given browsing session is being run by a human or bot with legitimate intent
How? If an agent browses the web through that session, then how can you reasonably "assert" that?
websites "with strong knowledge of 'personhood'" issue anonymous tokens that browser users and designated bots can present at other websites
What does that mean? Some creepy website that forces one to verify their "personhood" (by scanning one's face for instance), that issues "trust me bro, it's anonymous" tokens to a specific browser. And then the user is expected to present these unique identifiers at other websites, like there's no possibility these can be passed back onto the issuer, and therefore re-identify the session-user?
the way people interact with the web is changing and increasingly may involve autonomous agents.
Yeah, and who is pushing for this change? Right, Google among other AI companies. You just got to love companies creating "solutions" for problems they themselves are, at least in part, responsible for.
Mozilla is committed to defending openness and user privacy on the web
Ah, thankfully we can trust Mozilla to protect the privacy-community's interests... I mean, they certainly haven't made controversial decisions is recent times.
Yet another platform with meaningless badges
Excellent video, and very applicable indeed! :)