Microsoft’s Copilot+ PC

[Kenzo]

Just warning about the new Copilot+ PCs .....

Microsoft has added keylogger / scanning feature to new Copilot+ PCs range . I can allready see some people will go buy those even without knowing this feature  

I think i will not update my WIN 10 to 11 after reading about this, i mean if there is even remote change they will add this feature to Win update by force in future ?

Microsoft Announces Feature That Saves a Screenshot of Your Computer Every Few Seconds. What Could Go Wrong?
 

 
Attempts to normalise ever more intrusive ‘SMART’ technologies have taken a concerning turn with Microsoft’s recent announcement of the Recall feature planned for its Copilot+ Windows 11 PC range.
Whilst not marketed as a surveillance capability, a system which automatically takes a screenshot of the user’s activity every few seconds, and saves it as a permanent record, opens up worrying possibilities.
Microsoft’s argument for this capability is that it avoids people having to remember where they put a file, or which webpages they were viewing, and by scanning these stored images with machine learning algorithms, and by utilising the capabilities of Large Language Models.
Recall can help users to ‘recall’ those things which most people can remember whilst relying solely on that hardware which resides inside their own skulls. The intention is that users can ask the AI running upon their computer a question using natural conversational language, and it can return to them an answer based upon, or including a record of, their earlier activity.
Formerly ‘surveillance’ was regarded as a ‘dirty word’ – to paraphrase General Melchett from Blackadder, it would perhaps belong somewhere close to ‘crevice’ – and Government agencies went to great lengths to reduce the impression of intrusiveness by describing some of their programmes as collecting ‘only’ metadata in an attempt to allay the concerns of the, rightly angry, public.

As i understand , big companys like Microsoft can give data to goverment if they ask it . Are you a dissident ?Are you against vaccines ? Are you independent thinker ?  Maybe the AI can make profile about you and report about you ?

Crazy times huh

[Blaine91555]

My take on that at first glance is that the goodness or badness of that feature is both subjective and objective depending on who has access and how it's used.

It's clearly something that is a valuable tool when it's not available to anyone but the user and that user's needs. It's a dangerous weapon if it has a back door available to other than the user or can be accessed without permission for nefarious purposes.

I'd say if Microsoft's true intent is to enhance their software and it's a feature that can be used or rejected by the end user, it's just another potentially useful feature and nothing more.

Now if Microsoft's goal is to spy for nefarious reasons, that's another story, but why would Microsoft want to keep a record of screenshots of all PC users? That brings me back to the issue I have with grand conspiracies. It would take so many people or so much computing power to monitor it, it makes no sense at all. Of course they could filter it, but it would need to be reviewed at some point by human eyes. It seems to me it would tie up so many people and so much computing power as to make it almost absurd to think that's the goal. To monitor everyone that is.

The real problem is not Microsoft, nor would Microsoft's plan be to monitor everyone. The problem would come if the government used it without a warrant to observe individuals. But then they can already do that.

As long as it's a feature that can be added or removed at will, I'd have no issue with it.

[Maxmars]

I think one significant solution to this is simple: Disclosure.

I mean base-level, ground floor disclosure.

Microsoft offers up it's wares via a marketing effort.  That means we rely on sales-staff and marketing media to determine what the product is.

What they never disclose is the fact that in order to use this product you must "agree" to their stated provisos... as if the "click" were your signature, and based upon that agreement, the operating system installed on your computer is rightfully theirs, not yours.  You can't change it, you can't even labor to analyze it without risking a breach in the agreement.

So they add more and more abusive, intrusive, and controlling capabilities within it, and it's their "right" by agreement.

Co-Pilot, and all such interfaces operate to "collect" data.  They offer what it can do for you... but never disclose what it does for them (Think: metadata.)

The internet was a noble idea, and those who live to exploit turned it into the avenue to make information about each individual person "a product."  Copilot is just another one of their tools...

"Give them an inch... then take a mile."

[Kenzo]

My take on that at first glance is that the goodness or badness of that feature is both subjective and objective depending on who has access and how it's used.

It's clearly something that is a valuable tool when it's not available to anyone but the user and that user's needs. It's a dangerous weapon if it has a back door available to other than the user or can be accessed without permission for nefarious purposes.

I'd say if Microsoft's true intent is to enhance their software and it's a feature that can be used or rejected by the end user, it's just another potentially useful feature and nothing more.

Now if Microsoft's goal is to spy for nefarious reasons, that's another story, but why would Microsoft want to keep a record of screenshots of all PC users? That brings me back to the issue I have with grand conspiracies. It would take so many people or so much computing power to monitor it, it makes no sense at all. Of course they could filter it, but it would need to be reviewed at some point by human eyes. It seems to me it would tie up so many people and so much computing power as to make it almost absurd to think that's the goal. To monitor everyone that is.

The real problem is not Microsoft, nor would Microsoft's plan be to monitor everyone. The problem would come if the government used it without a warrant to observe individuals. But then they can already do that.

As long as it's a feature that can be added or removed at will, I'd have no issue with it.

For me it`s not possible to trust much big tech companys , and even less to Bill Gates . 

Another scenario , what if there will happen something big ......i use january 6 insurrection as an example . They allready used social media data like discord to get the chat/conversations of the people in capitol . Imagine even something bigger happening in future ....are they then thinking, wait we can now search all data from all the people who has this microsoft OS . An excuse  to search , to get access to peoples computers .

The risk is also third party , hackers etc getting access to data , maybe ? if they find a open door.

I do agree that they would need huge computing power to do it , i do not know how they can do it exactly .

Major intelligency agencies have allready used scanning internet to find out who uses specific keywords people use , more or less....and red flags are given if they think someone is interesting fella . What if this is the pre-filter , getting in to the list where they next look all your data in operating system , just to be sure you are not dangerous terrorist , that is if the data would end to cloud where they have access .

So is this the next step, scanning/storing internet is not enough.....they want more , the all seeing eye want`t to see what people are doing in their computers .

---

I think one significant solution to this is simple: Disclosure.

I mean base-level, ground floor disclosure.

Microsoft offers up it's wares via a marketing effort.  That means we rely on sales-staff and marketing media to determine what the product is.

What they never disclose is the fact that in order to use this product you must "agree" to their stated provisos... as if the "click" were your signature, and based upon that agreement, the operating system installed on your computer is rightfully theirs, not yours.  You can't change it, you can't even labor to analyze it without risking a breach in the agreement.

So they add more and more abusive, intrusive, and controlling capabilities within it, and it's their "right" by agreement.

Co-Pilot, and all such interfaces operate to "collect" data.  They offer what it can do for you... but never disclose what it does for them (Think: metadata.)

The internet was a noble idea, and those who live to exploit turned it into the avenue to make information about each individual person "a product."  Copilot is just another one of their tools...

"Give them an inch... then take a mile."

Yeeh full disclosure would be helpfull .

The internet has become paranoid , sort of....they monitor everyone just in case ...

I will never let them get my award winning BBQ sauce recipe, that`s a fact .

[pianopraze]

They have agreed turned it off by default after major backlash…


… for now.

[Kenzo]

They have agreed turned it off by default after major backlash…


… for now.

Well that´s a relief .

At some point i will get linux , just to have second option in hand.

[Blaine91555]

I think the reality is that "they" can already monitor everything we do.