This is because AI models don’t just need text data to improve; they need diverse inputs in other forms, like audio or video. If Google can gather more data, and more types of data, from its vast array of users, then maybe it could innovate faster than its competitors.
Google’s massive user base is spread across multiple services, giving it an edge in data collection. “Google is in a unique spot compared to a lot of the other companies with this,” says Thorin Klosowski, a senior security and privacy activist at the Electronic Frontier Foundation. “Because they offer so many services that people have been using for so long and have grown pretty comfortable and complacent with the amount of data collected.” Apps that people use every day have a kind of built-in inertia, so changes that users don’t like may not be enough to drive them to alternative services.
Being forced to opt out of AI training seems to be the standard across sites and platforms. It doesn’t have to be this way. “I think ‘opt in’ is really asking the bare minimum of these companies,” Klosowski says. “Asking their users to consciously choose to enable these features is the least they can do.” Google would have to make a stronger case to users on why these features could be helpful if they weren’t automatically just turned on, Klosowski says.
In Google’s email sent to my testing account on June 23, the first sentence framed this change as giving me “even more control over saved history.” Google then provided examples in the message showing how saving this media may be helpful. “For example, this lets you revisit your past visual searches with Lens or continue a Search Live conversation about a song you heard.” In contrast, it’s notable that Google didn’t provide similar examples after stating near the end of the email that this saved media will be used for AI model training. Rather, the message just continued to the next detail.
This is another major software change that is worth slowing down to process the change for everyday users. “It creates this extra layer of math that a consumer has to do about whether they feel comfortable using the tool they’ve been using for a long time,” says Ben Winters, director of AI and privacy at the Consumer Federation of America.
I’m constantly overwhelmed that it’s always on me to opt out of data training for every service. It leaves me feeling like a schmuck who’s probably going to miss something buried in all these settings, no matter what.
Winters sees this change from Google as placing the onus on users to avoid AI training, which may contribute to widespread user exhaustion bordering on nihilism. “There’s an increasing feeling of powerlessness and hopelessness about even trying to protect your data, because every little thing is going to be squeezed out of you,” he says.
Read the full article here