> Not sure about this take. You need data at the end of the day, to
build good AI models.
I don't think she is saying that AI is predicated on surveillance as a
source of training data (although that does happen in a few
cases). She seems to be saying that surveillance is the primary use
case for AI.
Actually I don't think that's true, consider manufacturing
robots. However, mass surveillance, a societal scourge and urgent
threat to democracy, does seem to be greatly enhanced by AI, so I
think this is a bit of worry take.
> These days it feels like anyone's public takes are more or less just
a means to promote their own cause.
Wasn't it always true? Trivially all people advocate their beliefs,
with a few marginal exceptions like the guy who reads the weather
report.
I don't think she is saying that AI is predicated on surveillance as a source of training data (although that does happen in a few cases). She seems to be saying that surveillance is the primary use case for AI.
Actually I don't think that's true, consider manufacturing robots. However, mass surveillance, a societal scourge and urgent threat to democracy, does seem to be greatly enhanced by AI, so I think this is a bit of worry take.
> These days it feels like anyone's public takes are more or less just a means to promote their own cause.
Wasn't it always true? Trivially all people advocate their beliefs, with a few marginal exceptions like the guy who reads the weather report.