SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the I-can-help-if-you-give-me-your-PIN dept.
Predicting an eventual upturn in the sagging smartphone market, research director Ranjit Atwal told The Reg that while artificial intelligence has proven key to making phones more useful by removing friction from transactions, AI required more permissive use of data to deliver. An example he cited was Uber "knowing" from your calendar that you needed a lift from the airport.
"Today there an no good use cases for AI - it's just an enhancement of what we do on a phone. We're thinking ahead a few years, when AI can start to remove friction between us and the phone." This can be done by automating mundane tasks - such as ordering an Uber - but that will require users to share data with services they trust.
Another example Atwal cited was renewing house and car insurance. "If you haven't changed your car insurance there should be easier and more effective ways of doing that. But that only happens if you share your data."
That seems a tall order today. Since news broke that Cambridge Analytica used of [sic] Facebook data it should not have been able to access, Facebook has been on the end of the backlash for its permissive data sharing. And not just Facebook. Gay hookup service Grindr was found to be sharing medical information - including their HIV status - with third parties.
[...] "By 2020, AI capabilities on smartphones will offer a more intelligent digital persona on the device. Machine learning, biometrics and user behaviour will improve the ease of use, self-service and frictionless authentications. This will allow smartphones to be more trusted than other credentials, such as credit cards, passports, IDs or keys," Atwal concludes.
Putting the pieces together, then: if AI is to transform efficiency, and this transformation requires plenty of consumer data, and the data is valuable, then there are some interesting sums to be done. How much is your calendar worth? Will it be profitable for the likes of Uber to pay you for that data in order to get your business?
(Score: 5, Insightful) by archfeld on Saturday April 07 2018, @10:09PM (2 children)
I used to think lawyers were the lowest of the low on the occupation list, followed closely by politicians. Lately I have come to the conclusion that there are some low level politicians, county and lower usually who still have some semblance of humanity about them, and there are lawyers that do pro bono work, but the people who work for ad agencies are in fact the lowest of the low. There are no examples of ads/commercials that are not at best lies based on omission, and at worst outright lies designed to sell the product at any cost regardless of how low the have to stoop.
For the NSA : Explosives, guns, assassination, conspiracy, primers, detonators, initiators, main charge, nuclear charge
(Score: 4, Insightful) by MostCynical on Saturday April 07 2018, @10:22PM
Advertising has always been about conflating want with need, and outright lying.
You *need* a new car, better watch, new tv, new toaster.. When in reality, you don't need any of it.
So, an entire industry built on lying has represntatives who lie.
Unfortunately, just because they lie alot doesn't mean everything they say is a lie. This case is an example: it is true that AI systems won't get better without more data.
Alas, at *doesn't* mean anyone should give data away.
Certainly not to this bunch of lying scum.
"I guess once you start doubting, there's no end to it." -Batou, Ghost in the Shell: Stand Alone Complex
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Immerman on Sunday April 08 2018, @03:03PM
Yep. I've long felt that marketing was a inherently evil field, designed with the explicit purpose of creating false poverty to motivate you to waste money buying things that won't actually improve your quality of life or satisfy the perceived lack they created, and thus reduce your true wealth.