Top
Best
New

Posted by dlx 1 day ago

Meta to start capturing employee mouse movements, keystrokes for AI training(www.reuters.com)
Alt link: https://tech.yahoo.com/ai/meta-ai/articles/exclusive-meta-st...
736 points | 490 commentspage 4
darepublic 5 hours ago||
I assume meta is doing this to train use computer like capabilities
chrisellwood 2 hours ago||
I've been building tools around screen capture for a bit and every time one of these threads comes up the conversation ends up mushing two things together that aren't actually the same.

Hooking keystrokes, mouse, screenshots on a local machine is what every decent journaling or timesheet app already does, and nobody cares because the file stays on the user's machine. Meta isn't getting dragged because they figured out how to instrument work laptops. They're getting dragged because they're the ones holding the logs, and "just for training" is a promise that hasn't aged well anywhere it's been deployed the last ten years.

Annoying side effect — the genuinely useful version of this, local activity logs you own for your own records, gets lumped in with bossware every time this comes up. Most freelancers and consultants I know would pay for the former. Most of them would quit over the latter.

stingrae 15 hours ago||
If it is available for training, I assume it is available for discovery.
atleastoptimal 18 hours ago||
Do most people who work in AI companies realize that if this buildup of reasoning models succeeds at what every tech CEO is aiming for, all of them will be out of a job?
hx8 18 hours ago||
Yes! That is exactly why they talk about "the permeant underclass" and hold onto their RSUs.
blitzar 10 hours ago|||
It is the case with most companies, that once you build something for them, you are out of a job.
ozgrakkurt 9 hours ago||
It is pretty obvious they won't succeed at that with LLMs.

They don't even understand what these people do.

It is delusion and lies all around.

rldjbpin 6 hours ago||
for the company that is one of the major players in tracking similar data across the web, i don't see much wrong with this.

if they continue to share their work through open releases despite the leadership change, i hope we get to benefit with their work.

not quite optimistic about the result as i wonder if on aggregate we all consistently interact with computers the most efficient way possible. maybe to beat captcha or scraper detection through mimicry perhaps.

dbgrman 17 hours ago||
Because ends justify means. To quote Boz himself:

“ The ugly truth is that we believe in connecting people so deeply that anything that allows us to connect more people more often is de facto good. It is perhaps the only area where the metrics do tell the true story as far as we are concerned.”

andrekandre 17 hours ago||
> connect more people more often is de facto good

i've heard it described that evil is that which believes itself to be good without exception. i think i'm starting to agree...

le-mark 4 hours ago||
“Good” for their bottom line, not for the people.
reroute22 12 hours ago|||
While reality can be anything but.

As far as I understand, there is plenty of research there in disciplines raging from social studies through psychology to game theory and economics, as well as informal simulations, that strongly suggest that human interactions are positive to participants pretty much if and only if those interactions are repeated, which realistically only occurs if participants are circumstantially close already - same neighborhood, same job, family, friends, same school, etc.

One-off interactions are almost invariably toxic with at least one of the participants getting cheated, bullied, or otherwise harmed.

So the whole premise of connecting people unconditionally, including anonymously, automatically, and from opposite sides of the world is inherently broken and doomed to do a lot of damage.

So even Meta's self proclaimed mission is damaging to society if followed, what could possibly at that point be expected from what they actually do, given the combination of basic facts that the primary purpose of any business is to make money, Meta's specific notoriously evident disregard towards ethics, their position as an advertisement business and entertainment provider, being deep into enshitification and market saturation, and of course actual honest mistakes to boot.

c-oreills 5 hours ago||
> human interactions are positive to participants pretty much if and only if those interactions are repeated

> One-off interactions are almost invariably toxic

I think these claims are too strong. I can believe that there's less incentive to treat people well when you don't expect to repeat interactions.

To give a mundane counter-example: last week I had a flight where I chatted on-and-off with the person next to me. I had zero expectations of repeat interactions with them following the flight, and it was still a friendly and courteous exchange, on both sides.

dbgrman 17 hours ago||
“ That's why all the work we do in growth is justified. All the questionable contact importing practices. All the subtle language that helps people stay searchable by friends. All of the work we do bring more communication in. The work we will likely have to do in China some day. All of it.”
CarbonCycles 16 hours ago||
How is this supposed to improve productivity? I'm still struggling with the framing of the business productivity gained from this?

I will say that I feel for the folks who work at Meta...I can't help but to feel they have long jumped the shark.

vidarh 11 hours ago||
So happy I decline to even start the Meta interview cycles. The company seemed ridiculous even back then, but this is next level.
vigneshwaraya 17 hours ago|
this would be a good time for Meta employees to reconsider their life choices.
More comments...