this post was submitted on 23 Jul 2025
130 points (97.8% liked)
Technology
290 readers
313 users here now
Share interesting Technology news and links.
Rules:
- No paywalled sites at all.
- News articles has to be recent, not older than 2 weeks (14 days).
- No videos.
- Post only direct links.
To encourage more original sources and keep this space commercial free as much as I could, the following websites are Blacklisted:
- Al Jazeera.
- NBC.
- CNBC.
- Substack.
- Tom's Hardware.
- ZDNet.
- TechSpot.
- Ars Technica.
- Vox Media outlets, with exception for Axios(Due to being ad free.)
- Engadget.
- TechCrunch.
- Gizmodo.
- Futurism.
- PCWorld.
- ComputerWorld.
- Mashable.
- Hackaday.
- WCCFTECH.
More sites will be added to the blacklist as needed.
Encouraged:
- Archive links in the body of the post.
- Linking to the direct source, instead of linking to an article talking about the source.
founded 2 months ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
This is what my brain already does (imperfectly). Am I a privacy nightmare? What's the difference between my brain and my personal recording machine?
No it doesn't.
You can vaguely record maybe one conversation you overhear in addition to one you are having yourself at the same time. You definitely can't record every conversation in a room you're in. A mic can't either, but three, four, half a dozen people talking? Yeah, you can definitely pull that out of a recording.
It's been shown that a laptop mic is enough to decode what someone is typing on a keyboard in the same room, just from the unique acoustic difference between each key.
So no. What your brain does is nowhere near the absolutely data-black-hole that a live mic in every room would be.
Once there's enough of these, you might even cross-reference multiple recordings to assemble complete conversations between people who didn't have one on themselves, or even spend the full duration of a conversation within range of the same recording device. That is something your head absolutely cannot do.
What if an offline system transcribes and summarizes in memory, only saving summary text of key ideas, points, things needed to be remembered for later? (not looking for a legal opinion, just an ethical one).
Oh yes. I have no doubt technology is better than my brain. I'm thinking more philosophically.
If I'm already recording the world with my brain, why can't I also record the world with my technology? A written diary is not illegal. Why should anything more advanced be illegal? Where is the line?