@MikeDunnAuthor @bookstadon

Remember that it wasn't just that Luddites attacked the factories owned by the oligarchs of their time.

It was that Parliament had put laws in place to protect the weavers from their industry being automated from under them, but the oligarchs went ahead and started automating anyway.

The Luddites did not break the new looms that were owned by the weavers using them.

They were just enforcing the laws that were being broken by the oligarchs.

#AITraining #AI

🛑 TikTok: The Worst of the Big Socials?

Yes, TikTok's Licence is Worse.

TikTok's rules are the same as Meta's: You own the Copyright, but TikTok owns the Licence to use, copy, and change your content forever, with no pay.

🤯 Data Access: TikTok's data collection is famous for being extremely broad. They track details like your:

Device model
Battery state
Keystroke patterns (how you type/tap)

AI Training: They use this massive data haul (your videos, your watch time, your clicks) to train their powerful, unrivalled AI algorithm. They are feeding the machine their best data.

National Security: The ownership structure is under constant fire from governments, which adds a high-stakes, political risk to your data.

TikTok is the most aggressive data collector out of Meta & LinkedIn.

SURE: You get fame, but you give away more power than anywhere else.

🤔 Is the chance of virality worth giving up control over your typing patterns?

cf.
https://tech.lgbt/@Crissy/115790285582264152

#TikTokLaw #DigitalOwnership #AITraining

💼 LinkedIn: Same Licence, Different Vibe

Is LinkedIn different from Meta? Not legally.

You own the Copyright (your idea). LinkedIn owns the Licence (permission to use it).

⚖️ The Short Version:
LinkedIn can legally use your post for ads, promotion, or to improve its site without paying you.

🚨 AI Training: LinkedIn is now using your profile, posts, and resumes to train its AI models. They opt you in by default.

The Difference: On LinkedIn, you post career data for matching. This gives the licence a professional purpose. But the AI grab is the same as Meta's.

If the Fediverse has tech issues, Big Social has big ownership issues that cost you your IP. Choose wisely.

🤔 Does knowing you must opt-out of LinkedIn's AI change what you share for your career?

cf. post on your pics on Meta aka FB
https://tech.lgbt/@Crissy/115790261887255733

#LinkedInLaw #DigitalOwnership #AITraining

📸 Your Photos, Their Rules?
On Big Social: Who REALLY Owns Your Posts?

You post a great photo on Facebook or Instagram. Who owns it?

⚖️ The Simple Truth: You own the Copyright. (The idea is yours.)
BUT
Meta owns the Licence. (They have permission to use it.)

🤯 What The Licence Means

The licence you agree to gives Meta the right to use your content for anything they want, forever, without paying you.

🤖 AI Training: Meta uses your photos and posts (even old ones!) to teach their AI models. You are feeding their big computer for free.

🚫 No Stopping: Meta can share or change your photo. Even if you delete it, Meta might keep using it if they need it later.

The Fediverse has small tech problems. Big Social has big ownership problems.

Stop feeding the machine that takes your value.

🤔 Real talk: Hearing about Meta using your content for AI—does that make the Fediverse look much safer?

followup on https://tech.lgbt/@Crissy/115789161317036431

#DigitalOwnership #AITraining #BigTech

Stop LinkedIn using your data to train unnamed AI! ⚠️

Quietly, LinkedIn have introduced opt-out AI training across all user content on LinkedIn without asking explicit permission.

LinkedIn is used by majority of working professionals, including many of us here on the Social Web.

Turn this setting off now if you want to protect your data and please boost for all to see!

#AI #LinkedIn #Boost #AITraining #DataPrivacy #SocialWeb #Tech

Stop LinkedIn using your data to train unnamed AI! ⚠️

Quietly, LinkedIn have introduced opt-out AI training across all user content on LinkedIn without asking explicit permission.

LinkedIn is used by majority of working professionals, including many of us here on the Social Web.

Turn this setting off now if you want to protect your data and please boost for all to see!

#AI #LinkedIn #Boost #AITraining #DataPrivacy #SocialWeb #Tech

"Everyone sharing his or her data to train A.I. is great if we agree with the goals that were given to the A.I. It’s not so great if we don’t agree with these goals; and if the algorithm’s decisions might cost us our jobs, happiness, liberty or even lives.

To safeguard ourselves from collective harm, we need to build institutions and pass laws that give people affected by A.I. algorithms a voice over how those algorithms are designed, and what they aim to achieve. The first step is transparency. Similar to corporate financial reporting requirements, companies and agencies that use A.I. should be required to disclose their objectives and what their algorithms are trying to maximize — whether that’s ad clicks on social media, hiring workers who won’t join unions or total deportation counts.

The second step is participation. The people whose data are used to train the algorithms — and whose lives are shaped by them — should help decide their goals. Like a jury of peers who hear a civil or criminal case and render a verdict together, we might create citizens’ assemblies where a representative randomly chosen set of people deliberates and decides on appropriate goals for algorithms. That could mean workers at a firm deliberating about the use of A.I. at their workplace, or a civic assembly that reviews the objectives of predictive policing tools before government agencies deploy them. These are the kinds of democratic checks that could align A.I. with the public good, not just private power.

The future of A.I. will not be decided by smarter algorithms or faster chips. It will depend on who controls the data — and whose values and interests guide the machines. If we want A.I. that serves the public, the public must decide what it serves."

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/11/02/opinion/ai-privacy.html?unlocked_article_code=1.yU8.8BEa.DltbW_WwVhxN&smid=nytcore-android-share

#AI #Algorithms #Privacy #DifferentialPrivacy #AITraining

"Everyone sharing his or her data to train A.I. is great if we agree with the goals that were given to the A.I. It’s not so great if we don’t agree with these goals; and if the algorithm’s decisions might cost us our jobs, happiness, liberty or even lives.

To safeguard ourselves from collective harm, we need to build institutions and pass laws that give people affected by A.I. algorithms a voice over how those algorithms are designed, and what they aim to achieve. The first step is transparency. Similar to corporate financial reporting requirements, companies and agencies that use A.I. should be required to disclose their objectives and what their algorithms are trying to maximize — whether that’s ad clicks on social media, hiring workers who won’t join unions or total deportation counts.

The second step is participation. The people whose data are used to train the algorithms — and whose lives are shaped by them — should help decide their goals. Like a jury of peers who hear a civil or criminal case and render a verdict together, we might create citizens’ assemblies where a representative randomly chosen set of people deliberates and decides on appropriate goals for algorithms. That could mean workers at a firm deliberating about the use of A.I. at their workplace, or a civic assembly that reviews the objectives of predictive policing tools before government agencies deploy them. These are the kinds of democratic checks that could align A.I. with the public good, not just private power.

The future of A.I. will not be decided by smarter algorithms or faster chips. It will depend on who controls the data — and whose values and interests guide the machines. If we want A.I. that serves the public, the public must decide what it serves."

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/11/02/opinion/ai-privacy.html?unlocked_article_code=1.yU8.8BEa.DltbW_WwVhxN&smid=nytcore-android-share

#AI #Algorithms #Privacy #DifferentialPrivacy #AITraining

Or am I too optimistic? 🤔

#Google #gemini #GoogleMail#DSA#GDPR#AItraining #privacy

Book authors made the wrong arguments in Meta AI training case, judge says https://arstechni.ca/8nfR #copyrightinfringement #AItraining #torrenting #copyright #leeching#Policy#LLaMA #meta #AI

Book authors made the wrong arguments in Meta AI training case, judge says https://arstechni.ca/8nfR #copyrightinfringement #AItraining #torrenting #copyright #leeching#Policy#LLaMA #meta #AI

What on earth, SoundCloud??

"In the absence of a separate agreement that states otherwise, You explicitly agree that your Content may be used to inform, train, develop or serve as input to artificial intelligence or machine intelligence technologies or services as part of and for providing the services."

https://soundcloud.com/terms-of-use

via @sarahdal https://crispsandwi.ch/@sarahdal/114477755873097160

#soundcloud #AI #copyright #musicians #AITraining