- 2 Posts
- 21 Comments
btw, just to let folks know – there’s a similar community from our federation friends !Videos@nrsk.no
I mean the topic isn’t exactly new, hence there are lots of groups writing about AI in GDPR. It all makes kinda difficult to find good source that would resolve your personal fears. However, as honorable mentions here are few sources:
- Making AI GDPR Compliant
- Artificial Intelligence and the GDPR: incompatible realities?
- EU’s Proposed Artificial Intelligence Regulation: The GDPR of AI
Would like to state clear that I’m not a professional in this field. If you would like to know more about the topic, I’d discuss it with our brilliant @nicfab@community.nicfab.it | @nicfab@mastodon.nicfab.it or subscribe to his community. He talks a lot about user privacy and by extend might be interested in GDPR compliance for AI.
Thank you so much for getting it this far. People like you make Open Source going. Alone for years, mounting thousands of hours behind the screen.
Yes, this is a tough time to battle for place in messenger space. But there will be the time. Hope you’ll take care of yourself and be fresh to guide future collaborators.
Once again, thank you very, very much for your efforts 💙
I get that everyone’s imagining the most apocalyptic scenario right now: that Telegram shared all the messages of all members with timestamps, device IDs, phone numbers, geolocation etc
However, the case to be made that Telegram could simply invite the IT auditor in contact with authorities to their office and show her that in fact the company stores very little information; the information which does not change the legal case they’re involved in. Therefore, in this case they might have provided the information about presence or absence of the user data without actually sending said data. That way formally they have complied with the ruling but the user data have never left the office.
The same way you can send the headers of a data pipeline without actually sending any data.
The fact the company complied with the ruling to disclose the absence of information doesn’t necessarily mean they shared the users data.
Of course, this scenario is just my speculation and the company will have to present transparent and verifiable explanation. Yes, the situation looks bad but at the moment of writing, there’s still some wiggle room left.
Tbh, birdsite exodus is not that huge at the moment. It seems like it’s going to peak at 800k users per week. With 10% of active users, we have a whole one-two months before the count of new users will be equal to old ones.
Admins have time to react, users have opportunity to tell newbies about the culture on fair grounds, founders have a moment to adjust their development strategy for larger userbase. With 1 mil of new users per day we wouldn’t have all that.
Praise the lord Thank Musk, birdsite hasn’t shut down completely yet
Imagine alt-right activitist would open this community saying exact same thing you do: “don’t worry, I’m going to respect my rules”. His community would get on board, some more radical than others. The most eager ones would be breaking the rules delivering his points but he’ll be reluctant to deliver the justified ban. He’d try to weasel out from this responsibility saying anything to get the party going.
Knowing all that in advance, why would you trust this person in the first place?
In fact, this situation already happened in the past. Look at lemmy.ml, initially non communist platform, but has been routinely raided by communists because they know admin will almost always be on their side (even if they break the rules). So, quite often they are very comfortable harassing others. Were admins’ intentions not pure from the start? I think not, it’s just a tough thing to do: to moderate space if you keep an ideology in mind.
How are you different?
Right off the bat, can you see perhaps a bit of bias which this community is bound to saturate over? I mean, you’re going to be the mod and you have a clear ideology
Given this, I’d argue it’s not exactly a universal community for various sources but rather “talking points” of your community supported by sources you deem sufficient
At this point, I’m wondering why it is not hosted on lemmygrad to clearly show its alignment?
I hope one day philosophy will lower the barrier to its entry and allow people with lower attention span (like me), to engage with it on equal grounds
P.S. shout out to @tomasz@lemmy.ml who writes amazing questions / articles on philosophy and morals
That’s the thing, devs are not just “located” at lemmy.ml, devs run lemmy.ml; they do run it the way they want.
If you and I don’t agree with this administration style, rather than change devs for who they are as people, we’re better off to promote communities (hence making them default) which we want to be a part of AND still be grateful for the work devs do for us all.
Currently there’s this message coming from admins that lemmy.ml is no longer flagship instance.
I totally support blocking instances but while this feature is unavailable, we can help build new flagship instance.
I’m sorry if I sounded too rush, it is indeed not a solution, just a workaround for current situation.
Anyways, thank you for raising important questions, cheers
The easiest solution for now is to join us at beehaw.org or our friends at sopuli.xyz. We block lemmygrad and put much care in moderation
I also noticed that I don’t get posts in my feed from some communities of other instances. For example !linuxhumor@lemmy.ml
I can’t find this community via search from beehaw as well unless I preview it on lemmy.ml
Can anybody confirm this?
At this point, being blocked by them is some sort of quality control haha
Would be interesting to see full list of privacy services blocked by them 🤔