sorted by: new top controversial old
[-] [email protected] 6 points 11 hours ago

Still the same shit study that does not even name the version they used…?

The answer to your question would be evident to you if you had taken the time to read what you are deeming "the same shit study." The study mentions the version used on multiple occasions:

For each of the 517 SO questions, the first two authors manually used the SO question’s title, body, and tags to form one question prompt and fed that to the free version of ChatGPT, which is based on GPT-3.5.

Additionally, this work has used the free version of ChatGPT (GPT-3.5) for acquiring the ChatGPT responses for the manual analysis.

Hence, for this study, we used the free version (GPT-3.5) so that the results benefit the majority of our target populations.

Please ensure you have read the study before making uninformed remarks.

The one posted here 1 or 2 days ago?

I have already checked for duplicates within this community before posting, and the post you are talking about is not present.

Once again, please ensure your facts are accurate before making incorrect statements.

submitted 13 hours ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

The research from Purdue University, first spotted by news outlet Futurism, was presented earlier this month at the Computer-Human Interaction Conference in Hawaii and looked at 517 programming questions on Stack Overflow that were then fed to ChatGPT.

“Our analysis shows that 52% of ChatGPT answers contain incorrect information and 77% are verbose,” the new study explained. “Nonetheless, our user study participants still preferred ChatGPT answers 35% of the time due to their comprehensiveness and well-articulated language style.”

Disturbingly, programmers in the study didn’t always catch the mistakes being produced by the AI chatbot.

“However, they also overlooked the misinformation in the ChatGPT answers 39% of the time,” according to the study. “This implies the need to counter misinformation in ChatGPT answers to programming questions and raise awareness of the risks associated with seemingly correct answers.”

submitted 15 hours ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
  • iFixit and Samsung are ending their partnership on a direct-to-consumer phone repair program.
  • iFixit CEO Kyle Wiens says "Samsung does not seem interested in enabling repair at scale" and that the deal is not working due to high parts prices and difficulty of repairs.
  • Samsung only ships batteries pre-glued to the phone screen, forcing customers to pay over $160 even for just a battery replacement, unlike with other vendors.
  • The contract also limited iFixit to selling no more than 7 parts per customer in a 3-month period, hampering their ability to support local repair shops.
  • Additionally, Samsung required iFixit to share customer email addresses and purchase history, which iFixit does not do with other partners.
  • iFixit says it will continue to stock aftermarket Samsung parts and publish repair guides, but will no longer work directly with Samsung on official repair manuals.

iFixit says:

We clearly didn’t learn our lesson the first time, and let them convince us they were serious about embracing repair.

We tried to make this work. Gosh, we tried. But with such divergent priorities, we’re no longer able to proceed.

submitted 2 days ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
submitted 2 days ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
submitted 2 days ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

Archive link:

In exchange for selling them repair parts, Samsung requires independent repair shops to give Samsung the name, contact information, phone identifier, and customer complaint details of everyone who gets their phone repaired at these shops, according to a contract obtained by 404 Media. Stunningly, it also requires these nominally independent shops to “immediately disassemble” any phones that customers have brought them that have been previously repaired with aftermarket or third-party parts and to “immediately notify” Samsung that the customer has used third-party parts.

Aaron Perzanowski, a personal property law expert and professor at the University of Michigan Law School, told me “Most consumers would be very surprised to learn that their personal information and details about their devices are being shared with the manufacturer. And I doubt there is any meaningful disclosure of or consent to sharing that data. So this looks like a substantial and unexpected invasion of consumer privacy.”

“This is exactly the kind of onerous, one-sided ‘agreement’ that necessitates the right-to-repair,” Kit Walsh, a staff attorney at the Electronic Freedom Foundation and right to repair expert told me. “The data collection is excessive. I may not have chosen to disclose my address or identity to Samsung, yet an added cost of repair—even at an independent shop—is giving that information up. In addition to the provision you mentioned about dismantling devices with third-party components, these create additional disincentives to getting devices repaired, which can harm both device security and the environment as repairable devices wind up in landfills.”

submitted 2 days ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

Archive link:

The complete destruction of Google Search via forced AI adoption and the carnage it is wreaking on the internet is deeply depressing, but there are bright spots. For example, as the prophecy foretold, we are learning exactly what Google is paying Reddit $60 million annually for. And that is to confidently serve its customers ideas like, to make cheese stick on a pizza, “you can also add about 1/8 cup of non-toxic glue” to pizza sauce, which comes directly from the mind of a Reddit user who calls themselves “Fucksmith” and posted about putting glue on pizza 11 years ago.

A joke that people made when Google and Reddit announced their data sharing agreement was that Google’s AI would become dumber and/or “poisoned” by scraping various Reddit shitposts and would eventually regurgitate them to the internet. (This is the same joke people made about AI scraping Tumblr). Giving people the verbatim wisdom of Fucksmith as a legitimate answer to a basic cooking question shows that Google’s AI is actually being poisoned by random shit people say on the internet.

Because Google is one of the largest companies on Earth and operates with near impunity and because its stock continues to skyrocket behind the exciting news that AI will continue to be shoved into every aspect of all of its products until morale improves, it is looking like the user experience for the foreseeable future will be one where searches are random mishmashes of Reddit shitposts, actual information, and hallucinations. Sundar Pichai will continue to use his own product and say “this is good.”

submitted 1 week ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

Netflix has managed to annoy a good number of its users with an announcement about an upcoming update to its Windows 11 (and Windows 10) app: support for adverts and live events will be added, but the ability to download content is being taken away.

Netflix must realize that it's a huge frustration for people who relied on offline downloads to watch content without internet access: on planes, trains, and campsites, and anywhere else where Wi-Fi is unavailable or unreliable.

There's a small chance that Netflix will change its mind if it gets enough complaints, but the streaming service seems determined to add as many money-making features as possible, while taking away genuinely useful ones.

submitted 1 week ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

Microsoft is trying to restore Bing as the default search engine on users' browsers by spinning it as a "repair" through a utility app called PC Manager.

PC Manager is designed to boost a Windows PC's performance by freeing up memory and eliminating unused apps and files. It offers "Health check" and "Repair tips" buttons, which users can click on to see the recommended actions.

However, Windows Latest noticed the app pushing a curious recommendation: Both Repair tips and Health check nudge you to restore Bing as the default search engine on the Edge browser.

submitted 1 week ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
submitted 1 week ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

A feature Google demoed at its I/O confab yesterday, using its generative AI technology to scan voice calls in real time for conversational patterns associated with financial scams, has sent a collective shiver down the spines of privacy and security experts who are warning the feature represents the thin end of the wedge. They warn that, once client-side scanning is baked into mobile infrastructure, it could usher in an era of centralized censorship.

Apple abandoned a plan to deploy client-side scanning for CSAM in 2021 after a huge privacy backlash. However, policymakers have continued to heap pressure on the tech industry to find ways to detect illegal activity taking place on their platforms. Any industry moves to build out on-device scanning infrastructure could therefore pave the way for all-sorts of content scanning by default — whether government-led or related to a particular commercial agenda.

Meredith Whittaker, president of the U.S.-based encrypted messaging app Signal, warned: “This is incredibly dangerous. It lays the path for centralized, device-level client side scanning.

“From detecting ‘scams’ it’s a short step to ‘detecting patterns commonly associated w[ith] seeking reproductive care’ or ‘commonly associated w[ith] providing LGBTQ resources’ or ‘commonly associated with tech worker whistleblowing.’”

submitted 1 week ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

Google’s AI model will potentially listen in on all your phone calls — or at least ones it suspects are coming from a fraudster.

To protect the user’s privacy, the company says Gemini Nano operates locally, without connecting to the internet. “This protection all happens on-device, so your conversation stays private to you. We’ll share more about this opt-in feature later this year,” the company says.

“This is incredibly dangerous,” says Meredith Whittaker, the president of a foundation for the end-to-end encrypted messaging app Signal.

Whittaker —a former Google employee— argues that the entire premise of the anti-scam call feature poses a potential threat. That’s because Google could potentially program the same technology to scan for other keywords, like asking for access to abortion services.

“It lays the path for centralized, device-level client-side scanning,” she said in a post on Twitter/X. “From detecting 'scams' it's a short step to ‘detecting patterns commonly associated w/ seeking reproductive care’ or ‘commonly associated w/ providing LGBTQ resources' or ‘commonly associated with tech worker whistleblowing.’”

submitted 1 week ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
  • Arizona's Attorney General, Kris Mayes, filed two lawsuits against Amazon on Wednesday for allegedly engaging in deceptive business practices and maintaining monopoly status. The first lawsuit accuses the company of using dark patterns to keep users from canceling their Amazon Prime subscriptions, violating Arizona's Consumer Fraud Act. This is similar to a complaint filed by the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) against Amazon in June.

  • The second lawsuit alleges that Amazon unfairly maintains its monopoly status through agreements with third-party sellers that restrict them from offering lower prices off of the platform than they do on Amazon, violating Arizona's Uniform State Antitrust Act. This practice has also been targeted by other state attorneys general in cases filed against Amazon.

  • Additionally, the lawsuit accuses Amazon's Buy Box algorithm of being biased towards first-party retail offers or sellers who participate in Fulfillment By Amazon, leading consumers to overpay for items that are available at lower prices from other sellers on Amazon. This aspect is also reflected in the FTC's recent antitrust lawsuit against Amazon, which has been joined by more than a dozen state attorneys general.

  • Arizona seeks to stop Amazon from engaging in these allegedly deceptive and anticompetitive practices and award civil penalties and disgorgement of ill-gotten gains.

[-] [email protected] 28 points 1 month ago

the purpose of this post is not to endorse the use of Reddit (), but rather to inform users of a privacy-friendly approach in case they need to utilize the platform.

[-] [email protected] 12 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

i deleted the crossposts of this post from /c/[email protected] and /c/[email protected] (because protonmail is a faux-opensource snakeoil privacy product) and flagged the posts in other communities as spam.

I find your response discouraging, and your actions appear excessive. While Proton may not be flawless, it does offer superior privacy protection when compared to commonly used options like Google and Microsoft.

I volunteered my time and effort to craft the post, including citations, offering more background information, and incorporating reliable links to official resources. However, you made claims without substantiation, deleted the crossposts of my post from /c/[email protected] and /c/[email protected], and flagged the posts in other communities as spam. Your decision seems to be unsupported by members of the four communities I had shared my post to.

It's disheartening to see such actions taken without proper consideration, thereby causing harm to the privacy community at large. Avoiding hasty decisions that may stifle valuable contributions within the privacy community should be paramount. Consequently, I respectfully ask you to reconsider your initial reaction, abstaining from premature removals rooted in personal opinions devoid of solid backing.

By embracing a balanced stance that values both freedom of expression and responsible fact-checking, we contribute positively towards nurturing healthy debates and maintaining transparent communication channels. In light of this, I hope you will take the necessary steps to reinstate the removed posts, allowing for continued conversation on their merits.

Edit: You have now banned me from both of those communities.

Edit: You have deleted another post of mine from c/[email protected] that was titled "Chat Control May Finally Be Dead: European Court Rules That Weakening Encryption Is Illegal", with your reason being that it is "snakeoil spam" even though the community members do not think so (the post has more than 750 upvotes)

[-] [email protected] 0 points 3 months ago

I'm glad to hear that.

Even small, simple steps can go a long way towards safeguarding your data, so keep up the good work!

view more: next ›


joined 4 months ago