This may be out of date but in this video by Lawful Masses lawyers are concerned that software AI tools which somehow (I don’t recall) help them understand a case. This issue is the AI should not use information sourced from another client’s confidential case/documents to inform them about another case but they don’t know how it works. Responses from Microsoft were not forthcoming.

I would argue they can’t know unless they have access to the source code to verify what any (local) AI can do (not personally do it, but a trusted 3rd party audit which isn’t behind closed doors).

Consider that a program can edit the file while running at any point, not merely during user input. Like a virus with access to user’s files it could even edit a document that’s not even being displayed to the user on the screen.

Also no, you don’t know what it’s doing so you could be blindsighted by the latest AI update making unexpected changes. Not only from good-intentioned features but also bugs, or malicious anti-features after the CEO throws their toys out of the Twitter pram.

Creating text is not the only issue, it may be trained from your confidential files.

To really be sure would require knowing what software is actually doing - not just taking the claims made by the programmers (or more likely, the mere owners) of the proprietary software.

That sounds doubly difficult job.

Like how the cellular module is proprietary and locked down, even on something like a Librem phone. Or like how DVD players had to use proprietary software to force comply with DRM.

“It’s impossible” is often used not to literally describe a logically impossible event but instead as an exaggeration. “I can’t possibly fathom why” is also not literal, it means under regular circumstances.

I cannot imagine why anyone would prefer grass that cuts your skin over regular grass means for typical people using grass in typical garden/field situations. That could be someone’s person preference but that it’s not typical, it’s unexpected.

There’s a GPL compliance lawsuit where they’re suing NOT as a copyright holder of contrubtor’s code but as a user of the software (a 3rd party beneficiary, under contract law). The GPL was intended to give standing to users of the software, so hopeful this makes presidence.

I thought this comment would have gone down better. It’s a banger.

Headline should have been: porn sites have no spunk. Screw the government and just plug the whole country. Though we’ll no longer have easy access various VPNs will still allow us to reach around the block with IP protection (just like consuming BBC service without a license).