This alone would make me more likely to switch back to iPhone, as much as I hate the walled garden. “Just switch to a private messenger app” doesn’t really work when no one else uses them. I’ve even gotten all of my family to try Signal, but they dropped it in favor of going back to imessage. It’s extremely frustrating, far from ideal, but it is what it is.
Google reading my messages at all, even if it’s “oPt OuT”, is a complete non starter.
They dropped it because people assumed it was secure just because they used signal, and is never secure and you can assume pretty much anyone could be reading your texts wanyway.
There are three big reasons why we’re removing SMS support for the Android app now: prioritizing security and privacy, ensuring people aren’t hit with unexpected messaging bills, and creating a clear and intelligible user experience for anyone sending messages on Signal.
To me, all of those reasons are BS and easily gotten around. “Unexpected messaging bills?” Have a popup that warns you that this user doesn’t have an account and is about to send a SMS, potentially incurring a cost, as an example.
Having a unified app that supports your message protocol with SMS fallback is legitimately great. I’m still bitter signal canned that feature.
But it isn’t that big of a deal to just use two apps. It’s what I’ve had to do for a while now. Anyone I actually know goes into signal, and I use SMS for my boss, my dad, and various companies.
Not all AI is bad. In the healthcare sector it could improve decision-making, produce personalised treatment plans, and so forth.
Obviously, the healthcare professionals will have final say, but it’s a good tool to have. AI will not replace them. Though it will streamline cumbersome processes.
I am all for AI as long as it’s used in a non-dystopian manner.
Isn’t that what the doctor is already supposed to be doing? Looking at our history, charts, treatment attempts and customizing? Because if not I could just WebMD and pay a doc to write a scrip.
There are a lot of things doctors record in evaluations, and they feed these AIs this information and instead of these AIs spitting out a “diagnosis” they calculate risk of harm vs risk of further investigation.
In things like pediatrics, this reduces the need for unpleasant and dangerous procedures - a CT scan impacts a 6 year old way more than a 30 year old.
AI is extremely useful for problem domains with a ton of input, medicine being one. Doctors can only do so much and rely on algorithms just like the AI does. The AI has the benefit of being able to do it a fuckload faster, more accurately, and compare it to more relevant things.
Don’t confuse it with generative AI. this is a very different system than that.
There are already talks of military use, reading all your texts, eliminating jobs with no plan to support those who lost them, AI driven cars killing people, taking all creative work from humans and leaving the menial tasks…that’s nowhere near a complete list and it’s already dystopian.
The thing is, when private companies are the ones that hold the tech and monetize it, shit is going to get dystopian before you can say “artichoke.” Capitalism is dystopian. Late stage capitalism even more so. And we are fast approaching a new frontier in which these same evil tech companies will wield this unbelievable power. I get it. There are good uses. But when the end goal is profit, our best interest comes second, if not last.
It’s a tool like anything else. It’ll be used for everything like anything else. It cannot be stopped. All we can hope for are tools to mitigate the damage and applications to outweigh what bad it’s capable of. Trying to slow it down is like trying to stop a flood with buckets. Build a boat, it will only keep rising.
Maybe I’m just old and stuck in my ways, but I don’t see the upside here. Why would I need Google’s AI to be able to tell the tone of my messages and respond appropriately. They’re my messages. People send me messages to talk to me. In what world do I want to remove myself from that process?
If my wife texts me and says “when are you going to be home from work?” I don’t want an AI looking at my chat history and making a guess. I want to tell her what I have going on right now and respond. If a friend asks me if I wanna hang out this weekend, I don’t want AI checking my calendar and seeing I’m free and then agreeing to plans. I want to think about it and come to a decision myself.
Can someone smarter than me point to an actual good use case for this?
this is almost like when people traded baubles for valuable things to unknowing natives. corporations make these inane features and expect us to pay for them by giving them all our information. They dont bother to even ask, just assume we are ok with it by having all this crap on by default.
Suppressing repeated notifications has been a thing since messaging has been a thing. If your service doesn’t offer it, find a better one. Also, this is a hypothetical, and a bad one. Why would you not simply read the texts?
Google has just unveiled a game-changing AI upgrade for Android. But it has a darker side. Google’s AI will start to read and analyze your private messages, going back forever. So what does this mean for you, how do you maintain your privacy, and when does it begin.
Smartphone privacy is about to change forever
Google’s AI to begin analyzing private messages on Android smartphonesgetty
There’s understandable excitement that Google is bringing Bard to Messages. A readymade ChatGPT-like UI for a readymade user base of hundreds of millions. “It’s an AI assistant,” says Bard, “that can improve your messaging experience… from facilitating communication to enhancing creativity and providing information… it will be your personal AI assistant within your messaging app.”
But Bard will also analyze the private content of messages “to understand the context of your conversations, your tone, and your interests.” It will analyze the sentiment of your messages, “to tailor its responses to your mood and vibe.” And it will “analyze your message history with different contacts to understand your relationship dynamics… to personalize responses based on who you’re talking to.”
And so here comes the next privacy battlefield for smartphone owners still coming to terms with app permissions, privacy labels and tracking transparency, and with all those voice AI assistant eavesdropping scandals still fresh in the memory. Google’s challenge will be convincing users that this doesn’t open the door to the same kind of privacy nightmares we’ve seen before, where user content and AI platforms meet.
There will be another, less contentious privacy issue with your Messages requests to Bard. These will be sent to the cloud for processing, used for training and maybe seen by humans—albeit anonymized. This data will be stored for 18-months, and will persist for a few days even if you disable the AI, albeit manual deletion is available. MORE FOR YOU Trustworthy AI: String Of AI Fails Show Self-Regulation Doesn’t Work The Best Record Players For Beginners To Spin Vinyl Music The Technological Marvel Behind A Real Bug s Life MORE FROM FORBESGoogle Issues New Incognito Guidance For Chrome Users By Zak Doffman
Such requests fall outside Google Messages newly default end-to-end encryption—you’re literally messaging Google itself. While this is non-contentious, it’s worth bearing in mind. Just as with all generative AI chatbots, including ChatGPT, you need to assume anything you ask is non-private and could come back to haunt you.
But message analysis is different. This is content that does (now) fall inside that end-to-end encryption shield, in a world where such private messaging is the new normal. Here the push should be for on-device AI analysis, with data never leaving your phone, rather than content uploaded to the cloud, where more processing can be put to work.
This is where the Android Vs iPhone battlefield may well come into play. Historically, Apple has been much stronger when it comes to on-device analysis than Google, which has historically defaulted to the cloud to analyze user content.
Unsurprisingly, Apple’s own moves to bring generative AI to iPhone users will take that approach—on-device analysis as the default when it comes to user content, albeit with a carve-out for its request architecture. And there’s building excitement as to what might be on offer with this fall’s iOS 18.
“Apple is quietly increasing its capabilities,” The FT reported this week, “to bring AI to its next generation of iPhones… Apple’s goal appears to be operating generative AI through mobile devices, to allow AI chatbots and apps to run on the phone’s own hardware and software rather than be powered by cloud services in data centres.”
For its part, Bard says that “Google has assured that all Bard analysis would happen on your device, meaning your messages wouldn’t be sent to any servers. Additionally, you would have complete control over what data Bard analyzes and how it uses it.”
You will have to judge whether this gives you comfort enough to let Bard loose on your private content. A word of caution. There’s a difference between what can’t be done, such as breaching end-to-end encryption, and what isn’t being done, such as policies as to where content analysis takes place. I would urge strong caution on opening up your content too freely, unless and until we have seen proper safeguards.
Bard agrees. “While Google assures on-device analysis,” it says, “any data accessed by Bard is technically collected, even temporarily. Concerns arise about potential leaks, misuse, or hidden data sharing practices. The extent of Bard’s analysis and how it uses your data should be transparent. Users deserve granular control over what data is analyzed, for what purposes, and how long it’s stored.” MORE FROM FORBESHow To Change Your Google Maps Settings After Street View Warning By Zak Doffman
Bard also warns that such data analysis might bias its results. “AI algorithms can perpetuate biases present in the data they’re trained on. Analyzing messages could lead to unintended profiling based on language, demographics, or social circles.”
This integration of generative AI chat and messaging will transform texting platforms forever, it will quickly open up a new competitive angle between Google, Apple and Meta, whose smartphone ecosystems and apps run our lives.
“While an exact date is still unknown,” Bard says, “all signs point towards Bard’s arrival in Google Messages sometime in 2024. It could be a matter of weeks or months, but it’s definitely coming.” Meanwhile, what we’ve seen thus far remains buried deep inside a beta release and subject to change before release.
When it is live, think carefully before you unlock your Messages privacy settings. “Ultimately,” says Bard, “the decision of whether to use message analysis rests with you. Carefully weigh the potential benefits against the privacy concerns and make an informed choice based on your own comfort level and expectations.”
The analysis of your message history isn’t the only word of caution here. This deployment of Bard is just part of the shift from browser-based to directed search, and you will need to be increasingly cautious as to the quality of the results you’re being given. Bard isn’t a chat with a friend. It’s a UI sitting across the world’s most powerful and valuable advertising and tracking machine.
On which note, Bard left me with a final thought that might be better directed at its creators than its users: “Remember, you have the right to demand clarity, control, and responsible AI development from the companies you trust with your data.”
We need an antitrust law that defines a monopoly by size/revenue of company statically by percent of US GDP, US wealth, or revenue in a particular industry. Not something g that allows the “well it feels fine” kind of defense these companies can pull.
Wayyyy overdue. I havent been using google maps because of this total infringement on rights and the staggering number of criminal cases that you can become a suspect for just by being in the area
The key points are that Google Maps location history will be stored on-device, with an option to back it up (encrypted) to the cloud so if you switch devices you can keep the history. The default auto-delete will be three months, and you can increase or disable that limit.
I guess that means location history will no longer be accessible via the web site.
I don’t think Google has implemented any E2EE system for backups before (correct me if I’m wrong). I wonder how exactly this will work.
Yes, this seems designed to target the broad “who was in this area” warrants. Must have been a big enough headache for them that they came up with this new system. For me, I keep this location on indefinitely. Has been handy for me in a couple situations: I’m a scientist and helped me reconstruct my field work locations when I lost some field notes, and it helped me contact trace when I caught covid!
And here’s the realistic explanation for why and why now:
"…Orin Kerr, a law professor at the University of California, Berkeley, wrote on X on Wednesday that “from a public policy standpoint, that seems like a bummer.”
“Geofencing has solved a bunch of really major cases that were otherwise totally cold,” he wrote.
“And there are lots of ways of doing the legal process (including Google’s warrant policy, although that’s just one way) that are a lot more privacy protective than ordinary warrants. But I can see why this might be in Google’s business interest. If there isn’t a lot of economic value to Google in keeping the data, and having it means you need to get embroiled in privacy debates over what you do with it, better for Google to drop it.”
It’s a good thing! It never should have been allowed in the first place. But, Google didn’t give a fuck until it caused them enough hassle. Doing this is just a way to avoid something more expensive later, it isn’t a strong principled stand. And I’d bet small amounts that they’ll still have a way to use the data anyway. It won’t be some magic wand that means Google can’t make money off of it.
Sure. They won’t be able to access the data itself, but they’ll have already used the data as it was being generated to add metrics to your profile. So they don’t need it anymore if it’s already been utilized.
Liars always find a way to phrase things to misdirect.
Yes, they still can build a targeted profile per user, but no longer store a database of who was in an area that the police can issue a broad warrant to find out. So they get to have their cake and eat it too!
“Geofencing has solved a bunch of really major cases that were otherwise totally cold,” he wrote.
Citation needed. Solving a case for a police officer means finding a person who looks guilty, not that they’re actually guilty. Even if they’re convicted they could’ve just been convicted by being at the wrong place at the wrong time.
Just because a lot of spammers happen to come from India does not have any bearing on the achievements of their space agency.
In any case, if someone were to build a base on the moon, and it had a telephone (actually probably the only celestial body off earth where a telephone would be kinda viable, annoying due to the second or so of signal lag every time someone spoke, but probably possible, while everywhere else is too far away for real time voice communication like that), then I’d guess it would just use the area code of the program in question’s mission control center or similar facility, based on how phone calls to the ISS just use the phone in Houston and then get relayed through their radio communication system, as far as I understand.
I started riding with a Garmin bike radar and installed an app that tells me exactly how fast a car is going when it passes, and the majority are over the speed limit.
Just the other day, in a 60 km/h zone, I clocked two cars going 125 km/h.
If I thought for a second that police would charge these drivers using photo/video evidence, I’d fork over the $500 to get the radar with a camera built-in and report each and every speeding driver that passes me.
In Denmark we have the lovely new law that if you drive more than 100% over the speed limit and over 100 kmh or drive over 200 kmh at all or drunk driving with over 2‰ they confiscate the car and you are not getting it back at all. They confiscate the car regadles of who owns the car (with very few exceptions) and that is also if it is leased. So far since when the law started they have confiscated over 2000 cars in two years. It’s my favourite law of all laws right now. The fine for driving crazy is also nicely proportional to your income and it removes the car so the person cannot just drive without license afterwards.
forbes.com
Hot