[shpx]

Why do you care if a computer reads through your email? Its not like Larry Page is looking through your search history. AI seems to just be data expressed in some way, ei me and you are a physical expression of years of gigabit streams of data. This will only become more strongly felt as we get closer to serious AI.

Sadly I think its something you either get used to or go live in the woods.

[pluma]

Same argument as the NSA: "It's not surveillance until a human looks at the data"

[marvy]

Interesting point, but there's a potentially important, albeit somewhat subtle difference. Google collects data which they claim nobody will ever look at. The reason they collect lots of data is so that machines can look at all of it now, while the NSA collects lots of data because they think that a person might need to look at some of it in the future.

[pluma]

If anything, that makes Google's bulk data collection more suspect than the NSA's. Not only do they collect it en masse, they also process it.

(Note that I personally think Google's collection is more ethically defensible than the NSA's, if only because they at least seek implied consent whereas the NSA doesn't even have to pretend)

[jonlucc]

The most obvious answer for me is that the computer could tell people to take interest if the email matches some criteria. So it isn't the intrusive one, but it could automate finding people to intrude on.

[shpx]

Do you think that this hasn't been happening? As someone posting on tech site, you should be aware that they scan emails for keywords, probably google and certainly the NSA.

Furthermore, training LSTM networks on emails has nothing to do with what you are concerned about.

[Retra]

Whether or not it is currently happening really has no bearing on whether or not it should happen.