sorted by: new top controversial old
Who is reducing your privacy? Data Privacy Ranking | GDPR OMNIBUS in c/europe@lemmy.dbzer0.com
74
AI: EU Member States approve “digital expropriation” for AI companies (noyb.eu)
 

On Wednesday, EU Member States approved a change to the GDPR that would put the profit-making interests of OpenAI, Anthropic, Google, Meta and SpaceX over European's fundamental right to data protection. According to the approved text, processing personal data “in the context of AI” should automatically be lawful. In particular, Big Tech would be able to use all personal data collected over the past decades with virtually no restrictions, as long as this happens “in the context” of AI. Schrems: “Under the agreed text, the profits of AI companies would typically trump European’s fundamental right to privacy. This is nothing but a digital expropriation of Europeans.” All this is happening despite the key figures of AI corporations actively warning about the enormous risks associated with their own products.

94
AI: EU Member States approve “digital expropriation” for AI companies (noyb.eu)
 

On Wednesday, EU Member States approved a change to the GDPR that would put the profit-making interests of OpenAI, Anthropic, Google, Meta and SpaceX over European's fundamental right to data protection. According to the approved text, processing personal data “in the context of AI” should automatically be lawful. In particular, Big Tech would be able to use all personal data collected over the past decades with virtually no restrictions, as long as this happens “in the context” of AI. Schrems: “Under the agreed text, the profits of AI companies would typically trump European’s fundamental right to privacy. This is nothing but a digital expropriation of Europeans.” All this is happening despite the key figures of AI corporations actively warning about the enormous risks associated with their own products.

Meta Is Refusing to Remove AI-Generated Facebook Videos of Graphic Child Abuse, Including a Baby Roasting in an Oven. Meta is making it clear: it doesn't care about AI-generated child abuse videos. in c/technology@lemmy.world
[–] 15 points 1 month ago (2 children)

I agree with the points you’re making, but I’d also like to put in my two cents as a victim of CSA and CSAM production. Not that it makes me an any sort of authority on it; I just wanted to share my opinion.

I don’t think fictional material should be considered the same as real footage. In real material there is a victim whereas (unless a person’s likeness is being used) there is none in fictional material. The reason CSAM is so horrible is because of the fact there is a victim, not because the material itself is disturbing (which it is, don’t get me wrong). I think that making them equal crimes is a huge disservice to the victims and downplays the crime that was committed against them, both socially and legally. In my experience a lot of people already oppose CSAM more so due to the material being graphic rather than the actual assault and continued violence against the victim by possessing/sharing footage of it.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • context
    • Dying of prosperity, 14TB HDD left unused in c/selfhosted@lemmy.world