Jump to content

Shatter

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    982

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    8

 Content Type 

Blog Comments posted by Shatter

    Rynturning_Light

    Posted

    3 minutes ago, Rynturning_Light said:

    NOW we should figure out where the hell I (apparently) heard of this offhandedly and why i felt the need to write it down

    i honestly might

    I don’t got much going on in my free time

    which we CANT have because I must be DOING things at all moments and hours of the day

    same. the adhd boredom is painful.

    i've been learning... stuff.

    everything

    and everything is free time.

    0
    Aeoryi

    Posted

    9 minutes ago, Verdance said:

    Art style is confident, colors are excellent, drawing is professional, polished, and likely digital. 
    Note that they are both blushing, meaning that while at first glance the one above is more confident and the one below is flustered, closer examination reveals the one above is likely emotionally reliant while the one below has eyes that display she is starstricken and most likely more introverted than flustered.

    I would agree with your analysis, Professor Verdance. It seems to be sound.

    0
    Frustration

    Posted

    6 hours ago, Frustration said:

    You know there are more polite ways to ask me for sources.

     

     

    I suppose I should start by saying this is starting in the US, and not all of these features are necessarily available(or available for users) everywhere.

    1. Photos has an "Opt-in" that has Gemini scan all photos in your album and generate images of you and your friends/family: https://www.forbes.com/sites/zakdoffman/2026/04/20/google-starts-scanning-all-your-photos-as-new-update-goes-live/
    2. Photos employs AI moderators that scan your photos and remove anything they deem violates their policies
    3. Photos has an AI search feature

    So they have an open admission that you can opt-in to having AI train on your photos, as well as two features that are passively looking at them. Of those two the search feature in particular is open about the fact that they do train on your prompts. In order to do that they also need to train off of the photos that you get the results from, which they don't say. Photos is next to inarguable.

    Docs is a bit less clear

    Google claims that it isn't training its models on them, but I have several reasons to doubt them.

    1. They added AI reading of documents, so you can listen to them. 
    2. Multiple people have reported that google has locked them out of their documents, with the only explanation that we can find being the content of the documents. https://freedom.press/digisec/blog/google-docs-locks-out-writer/
    3. Google has already added content filters to docs in the past.

    Google has show a pattern of behavior, that ignores user will and privacy, a short look at their history of fines over privacy law violations will show this. Hundreds of millions of dollars in individual fines, and yet despite this, they haven't stopped.

    These two things stand

    1. Google used to have a slogan, "Don't be evil"
    2. Statement number one is only true in the past tense.

    Even assuming they aren't actively training their models on everything right now, they have already begun implementing training on user data, and all signs indicate this will only increase. It takes a single update for an "opt-in" feature to become "opt-out" or even non-optional, assuming Google even honors the "opt-in" which they have proven before they are willing to violate(see below). The largest AI models already have everything easily available, and they are beginning to look for new material. Google is sitting on top of one of the largest sources of human writing, including material that no other AI model has access to.

    Do you really trust them not to?

    I wish you luck, but I don't think Google is too concerned about the law, or the potential penalties they would face.

      Reveal hidden contents

    In 2022 Google was fined $391 million dollars by 40 US states for continuing to track users locations after they had opted out of location sharing

    In 2025 France fined Google 325 million Euros for displaying ads without consent and collecting invalid consent from users during account creation, this follows after another 50 million euro fine in 2019 for the same reason

    In 2020 Google was fined 100 million euros for placing cookies without consent

    In 2025 Google was fined $425 Million dollars for violating California's privacy laws and recording user activity even after users had opted out of data sharing

    That's over a billion dollars just from ignoring privacy laws in the last couple of years. I didn't even list all of them, or their other legal fines for violating laws unrelated to privacy. In total Google was fined almost 4 Billion dollars in legal penalties in 2025 alone. https://proton.me/tech-fines-tracker

    Sorry about the impoliteness. I tend to get a bit annoyed and grumpy when I see information I believe is incorrect, and especially so for what I believe is misinformation. You have my deepest apologies.

    There is a difference between content processing, policy moderation, and training foundation models on private user data. For example, an AI search feature does require analysis and indexing (which are not the same as training), and moderation systems do exist for TOS reasons (For that writer, it depends on what she was writing. I'd love a screenshot of her screen to see the message.). Also, text-to-speech has been a thing since 1968. None of this leads me to believe that Google is training Gemini on my Grade 7 school projects, though.

    Given Google's past history with aggressive data collection and privacy violations, some people (such as you) do not trust their assurances that they keep this limited to user-based consent.

    I will concede that you do have some points, but some of your conclusions go beyond what I think is happening.

    Also, when I look at the fines, it seems most of the 4.24 billion dollar fines from 2025 is a 3.5 billion dollar fine from the European Union for illegally favouring its own digital advertising services.

    Do I think Google is all noble? Hell no. But do I think they are harvesting my info? No. Not really.

    1
    Frustration

    Posted

    3 minutes ago, Verdance said:

    Exactly 

    im a minimalist, i have used it many times, its generally a better search engine actually, as long as you fact check 

    i have used it to study, its good at making study guides and explaining topics

    but one you start asking it answers you lose all credibility and mental ability 

    its stupid how stupid public high schoolers can be (i was public high school student for two years it sucked)

    eyyyy. same here on all counts

    0
    Frustration

    Posted · Edited by Shatter

    Do you have any proof whatsoever that Google accesses Google Drive, Photos, Docs, etc., to take that info and feed it to Gemini?

    Because I find that highly unlikely and it stinks to high heaven of misinformation.

    From what I see is that Google can only access your docs if you enable Gemini. If they could do this they'd violate PIPEDA in Canada.

    "We do not use your Workspace data to train or improve the underlying generative AI and large language models ... outside of Workspace without permission."

    https://workspace.google.com/blog/identity-and-security/protecting-your-data-era-generative-ai

    0
×
×
  • Create New...