←back to thread

387 points bookstore-romeo | 3 comments | | HN request time: 0.417s | source
Show context
relyks ◴[] No.42198768[source]
This is pretty cool, but I feel as a pokehunter (Pokemon Go player), I have been tricked into working to contribute training data so that they can profit off my labor. How? They consistently incentivize you to scan pokestops (physical locations) through "research tasks" and give you some useful items as rewards. The effort is usually much more significant than what you get in return, so I have stopped doing it. It's not very convenient to take a video around the object or location in question. If they release the model and weights, though, I will feel I contributed to the greater good.
replies(29): >>42198776 #>>42198820 #>>42198904 #>>42199196 #>>42199360 #>>42199714 #>>42199738 #>>42199845 #>>42199898 #>>42200034 #>>42200093 #>>42200216 #>>42200311 #>>42200440 #>>42200507 #>>42200518 #>>42200537 #>>42200846 #>>42200895 #>>42201047 #>>42201144 #>>42201168 #>>42201185 #>>42201467 #>>42201486 #>>42201579 #>>42201792 #>>42202093 #>>42202186 #
PittleyDunkin ◴[] No.42200093[source]
> I have been tricked into working to contribute training data so that they can profit off my labor

You were playing a game without paying for it. How did you imagine they were making money without pimping your data?

replies(4): >>42200170 #>>42200179 #>>42200933 #>>42202487 #
ipsum2 ◴[] No.42200179[source]
Niantic made 700 million dollars last year, mostly selling virtual game items.
replies(2): >>42200195 #>>42200200 #
PittleyDunkin ◴[] No.42200200[source]
Why would anyone think niantic would protect user-data from profit?
replies(4): >>42200257 #>>42200292 #>>42200297 #>>42201306 #
saxonww ◴[] No.42200292[source]
Sarcastically, no one should.

Unsarcastically, a lot of people believe user data belongs to users, and that they should have a say in how it's used. Here, I think the point is that Niantic decided they could use the data this way and weren't transparent about it until it was already done. I'm sure I would be in the minority, but I would never have played - or never have done certain things like the research tasks - had I known I was training an AI model.

I'm sure the Po:Go EULA that no one reads has blanket grants saying "you agree that we can do whatever we want," so I can't complain too hard, but still disappointed I spent any time in that game.

replies(3): >>42200317 #>>42201544 #>>42202217 #
PittleyDunkin ◴[] No.42200317[source]
> Unsarcastically, a lot of people believe user data belongs to users, and that they should have a say in how it's used

I can understand that people believe this, but why do they do? Nothing in our society operates in a way that might imply this.

replies(5): >>42200439 #>>42200552 #>>42200915 #>>42201016 #>>42201847 #
interroboink ◴[] No.42201016[source]
> Nothing in our society operates in a way that might imply this.

I beg your pardon?

Consider just about any physical belonging — say, a book. When I buy a book, it belongs to me. When I read a book in my home, I expect it to be a private experience (nobody data-mining my eyeball movements, for example).

This applies to all sorts of things. Even electronic things — if I put some files on a USB stick I expect them to be "mine" and used as I please, not uploaded to the cloud behind my back, or similar.

And if we're just limiting ourselves to what we do in public (eg: collecting pokemon or whatever), it's still normal, I think, to interact relatively anonymously with the world. You don't expect people to remember you after meeting them once, for example.

In summary, I'd say that "things in our society" very much include people (and their tendency to forget or not care about you), and physical non-smart objects. Smart phones and devices that do track your every move and do remember everything are the exception, not the rule.

replies(3): >>42201165 #>>42201295 #>>42201364 #
1. PittleyDunkin ◴[] No.42201165[source]
> Consider just about any physical belonging — say, a book. When I buy a book, it belongs to me. When I read a book in my home, I expect it to be a private experience (nobody data-mining my eyeball movements, for example).

Perhaps this is just my own brain's degradation, but how far removed from society do you need to be to expect your purchases to not be sold to the highest bidder? This practice is certainly older than I am.

Forgive me if I cannot conceive of a consumer who has completely tuned out the last forty years of discourse about consumer protection. Hell, the credit bureaus themselves contradict the concept of consumer privacy.

replies(2): >>42201438 #>>42201458 #
2. Syonyk ◴[] No.42201438[source]
> Perhaps this is just my own brain's degradation, but how far removed from society do you need to be to expect your purchases to not be sold to the highest bidder? This practice is certainly older than I am.

It depends quite a bit on how you make your purchases.

If your purchases are on a credit card, with a loyalty ("tracking") card or App(TM) involved in the purchase? They're absolutely being sold to... well, probably not the highest bidder, but "all bidders with a valid payment account on file."

If you make a habit of paying cash for things and not using Apps or loyalty cards, and don't have your pocket beacon blaring loudly away on a range of radio frequencies when you shop, I expect a lot less data sales. It's a bit of a transition if you're used to credit cards, but once you're used to it, it's not bad at all, and involves a lot less data collection. I don't mind if the local barista or bartender knows me and my preferences, but I do mind if their POS system is uploading that data continuously.

3. interroboink ◴[] No.42201458[source]
Perhaps my main objection is that you said "Nothing in our society X" rather than "many things in our society Y."

I was just providing some counter-examples to show that there's more than nothing at play, here.

Certainly there are oodles of examples of our data being sold behind our backs, even well before 40 years ago. But there are also oodles of examples of the opposite.