Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | CalRobert's commentslogin

I dunno, this could be it but living in rural Ireland showed how many obnoxious teenagers will completely destroy a playground just for kicks. I'm sure a public toilet would fall prey to the same impulse.

It’s not a throwaway

When a house can’t be financialized it can be much, much, cheaper.

It seems like a lot of people are disagreeing with something she isn't saying. Surely it makes sense to have some concerns before dumping a bunch of kids' personal info into an AI?

Aside from that, the AFL doesn't seem to realize that using AI means uploading data to another company.

""" The AFL also gave her a technical answer. Copilot, its technology team explained, can only see files and emails Boyle could already open herself. It doesn’t give anyone new access to anything, the AFL’s information stays on the AFL’s own systems .... """

This statement seems reasonable enough

""" Meanwhile, on March 16, Boyle emailed to report that a trainee planned to tidy up a list of registered AFL program participants by putting it through an AI tool. The list held children’s personal details, drawn from PlayHQ, the platform community clubs use to register players. No AI policy existed at the time.

“Sharing detailed personal information of our registered participants to third-party AI companies seems like it would be in breach of their privacy,” she wrote. """

Finally, this alone is reason enough to rage quit.... """ Boyle says the facilitator told staff to give their AI assistants human names, rejecting suggestions like “Chatty” as insufficiently human, and to have the AI generate pictures of them. """


Does Australia have privacy provisions similar to the gdpr?

From the article:

> The AFL’s refusal to allow Boyle a choice is not unlawful. Employers in Australia can install software on the equipment they own, are exempt from privacy law when handling employee records


I was thinking more about the rights of the children in question.

Gdpr doen't apply to work you do for your employer, on employer's equipment either AFAIK

GDPR absolutely, 100%, applies to work people do for their employers. That's mostly the point of it! In this case I was wondering about the processing of the personal data of minors.

Mnemonics made keyboard shortcuts obvious but they’re basically dead now. Holding alt sometimes reveals them.

Heh, this is how browser accelerators from the dial up era worked

Speak for yourself. We’re not all raising gas guzzling kids who eat beef three times a day.

“Lol dude can’t their mom do that?”

-Random manager ca. 2018 when I explained I couldn’t join an 8 AM meeting because I had to take my kid to daycare.


It's very frustrating that behind every "you should be eternally grateful for every child no matter what" warm fuzzy message is an implicit "and if you ever express regret for having a kid who wound up non-verbal and violent and destroyed your marriage and your relationship with your other kids you're a horrible person".

Not referring to your cousin specifically but my mom's life's work is with severely autistic children (the "can't talk and hits people" sort, not "I'm a bit awkward and love math and doing anything to help autistic kids is abject cruelty!" sort), and the experience for parents mostly seems to be abject misery.


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: