Comment by A4ET8a8uTh0_v2
3 days ago
If it was that simple, there would be no practical reason to limit that scrub to three ( and in such a confusion inducing ways ). If I want to waste my time scrubbing, that should be up to me -- assuming it is indeed just scrubbing tagged data, because if anything should have been learned by now, it is that:
worst possible reading of any given feature must be assumed to the detriment of the user and benefit of the company
Honestly, these days, I do not expect much of Microsoft. In fact, I recently thought to myself, there is no way they can still disappoint. But what do they do? They find a way damn it.
It takes processing power to scan the photos.
then it should say "this setting can only be turned back on three times a year"
Does it take processing power to NOT scan photos?
No, but the scanning is happening on Microsoft servers, not locally, I am guessing.
So if you enable the feature, it sends your photos to MS to scan... If you turn it off, they delete that data, meaning if you turn it on again, they have to process the photos again. Every time you enable it, you are using server resources.
However, this should mean that they don't let you re-enable it after you turn it off 3 times, not that you can't turn it off if you have enabled it 3 times.
3 replies →
well said
Just because you can't personally think of a reason why the number shall be 3, and no more than 4, accepting that thou hast first counted 1 and 2, it doesn't mean that the reason is unthinkable.
I feel like you're way too emotionally invested in whatever this is to assess it without bias. I don't care what the emotions are around it, that's a marketing issue. I only care about the technical details in this case and there isn't anything about it in particular that concerns me.
It's probably opt-out, because most users don't want to wait 24 hours for their photos to get analyzed when they just want to search for that dog photo from 15 years ago using their phone, because their dog just died and they want to share old photos with the family.
This doesn't apply to your encrypted vault files. Throw your files in there if you don't want to toggle off any given processing option they might add 3 years from now.
> I feel like you're way too emotionally invested in whatever this is to assess it without bias
Did this line ever win an argument for you or you just use it to annoy who you're talking to?
It's easy for people to forget that being overly emotionally invested in their argument can cloud their judgement. Most of us do it at some point, I am not immune, but if someone has any reasonability in them then it can actually help at least reflect on why they are championing their position. They may not change their position, but they might try to form a better argument that has more solid grounds.
After all, sometimes an emotional reaction comes from a logical basis, but the emotion can avalanche and then the logical underpinnings get swept away so they don't get re-evaluated the way they should.
2 replies →
“Way too emotionally invested.”
Then proceeds to appeal to emotion with dog photo statement.
That's not an appeal to emotion, it's just being reasonable.
It's super common for people to take a cynical interpretation of something and just run with it, because negativity bias goes zoom.
Be less deterministic than that, prove you have free will and think for yourself.
1 reply →
<< It's probably opt-out
Clearly, you personally can't think of a reason yourself based on that 'probably' alone.
<< I feel like you're way too emotionally invested
I think. You feel. I am not invested at all. I have.. limited encounters with windows these days. But it would be silly to simply dismiss it. Why? For the children man. Think of the poor children who were not raised free from this silliness.
<< I only care about the technical details in this case and there isn't anything about it in particular that concerns me.
I can respect that. What are those technical details? MS was a little light on the details.
https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/office/group-photos-by-p...
"Microsoft collects, uses, and stores facial scans and biometric information from your photos through the OneDrive app for facial grouping technologies. This helps you quickly and easily organize photos of friends and family. Only you can see your face groupings. If you share a photo or album with another individual, face groupings will not be shared.
Microsoft does not use any of your facial scans and biometric information to train or improve the AI model overall. Any data you provide is only used to help triage and improve the results of your account, no one else's.
While the feature is on, Microsoft uses this data to group faces in your photos. You can turn this feature off at any time through Settings. When you turn off this feature in your OneDrive settings, all facial grouping data will be permanently removed within 30 days. Microsoft will further protect you by deleting your data after a period of inactivity. See the Microsoft account activity policy for more information."
You can also see here some of the ways they're trying to expose these features to users, who can use Co-Pilot etc. https://techcommunity.microsoft.com/blog/onedriveblog/copilo...
I turn all Co-Pilot things off and I've got all those AI/tagging settings off in OneDrive, but I'm not worried about the settings being disingenuous currently.
There's always a worry that some day, a company will change and then you're screwed, because they have all your data and they aren't who you thought they were anymore. That's always a risk. Just right now, I'm less worried about Microsoft in that way than I am with other companies.
In a way, being anti-government is GOOD, because overly relying on government is dangerous. The same applies to all these mega-platforms. At the same time, I know a lot of people who have lots a lot of data, because they never had it backed up anywhere, and people who have the data, but can't find anything, because there's so much of it and none of it is organized. These are just, actual real world problems and Microsoft legitimately sees that the technology is there now to solve these problems.
That's what I see.