South Korea's Personal Information Protection Commission has accused DeepSeek, a South Korean AI firm specializing in personalized content recommendations, of illegally sharing user data with its Chinese investor, ByteDance. The regulator alleges DeepSeek sent personal information, including browsing histories, to ByteDance servers without proper user consent, violating South Korean privacy laws. This data sharing reportedly occurred between July 2021 and December 2022 and affected users of several popular South Korean apps using DeepSeek's technology. DeepSeek now faces a potential fine and a corrective order.
An Oregon woman discovered her private nude photos had been widely shared in her small town, tracing the source back to the local district attorney, Marco Bocci, and a sheriff's deputy. The photos were taken from her phone while it was in police custody as evidence. Despite the woman's distress and the clear breach of privacy, both Bocci and the deputy are shielded from liability by qualified immunity (QI), preventing her from pursuing legal action against them. The woman, who had reported a stalking incident, now feels further victimized by law enforcement. An independent investigation confirmed the photo sharing but resulted in no disciplinary action.
HN commenters largely discuss qualified immunity (QI), expressing frustration with the legal doctrine that shields government officials from liability. Some argue that QI protects bad actors and prevents accountability for misconduct, particularly in cases like this where the alleged actions seem clearly inappropriate. A few commenters question the factual accuracy of the article or suggest alternative explanations for how the photos were disseminated, but the dominant sentiment is critical of QI and its potential to obstruct justice in this specific instance and more broadly. Several also highlight the power imbalance between citizens and law enforcement, noting the difficulty individuals face when challenging authority.
Summary of Comments ( 125 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43094651
Several Hacker News commenters express skepticism about the accusations against DeepSeek, pointing out the lack of concrete evidence presented and questioning the South Korean regulator's motives. Some speculate this could be politically motivated, related to broader US-China tensions and a desire to protect domestic companies like Kakao. Others discuss the difficulty of proving data sharing, particularly with the complexity of modern AI models and training data. A few commenters raise concerns about the potential implications for open-source AI models, wondering if they could be inadvertently trained on improperly obtained data. There's also discussion about the broader issue of data privacy and the challenges of regulating international data flows, particularly involving large tech companies.
The Hacker News post titled "South Korean regulator accuses DeepSeek of sharing user data with ByteDance" has several comments discussing the implications of the accusation and the broader context of data privacy concerns surrounding TikTok and its parent company, ByteDance.
Several commenters express skepticism about DeepSeek's claim of anonymizing data, pointing out the difficulty of truly anonymizing data, especially given the potential for re-identification through various means. One commenter specifically mentions differential privacy as a potential solution, but also acknowledges its limitations and the expertise required to implement it correctly.
The discussion also touches upon the regulatory landscape, with commenters noting the increasing scrutiny faced by companies like ByteDance regarding data collection and usage practices. Some comments highlight the perceived double standard applied to Chinese companies compared to Western companies, while others argue that such concerns are valid given the Chinese government's potential influence over its companies.
A few commenters delve into the technical aspects of data collection, discussing the types of data collected by apps like TikTok and the potential uses of such data. One commenter mentions the collection of sensor data and its potential use for inferring sensitive information about users.
Some of the more compelling comments include those that analyze the geopolitical implications of these data sharing accusations, suggesting that these issues are not solely about privacy but are also intertwined with international relations and economic competition. They raise concerns about potential data exploitation for purposes beyond targeted advertising, such as surveillance and national security.
There's also a discussion regarding the responsibility of app developers and platforms in ensuring data privacy. Commenters debate the effectiveness of current regulations and the need for stronger enforcement to protect user data.
Overall, the comments reflect a general concern about the increasing collection and potential misuse of user data by tech companies, particularly those with ties to foreign governments. The DeepSeek case is viewed by many commenters as another example of the challenges in balancing data-driven innovation with individual privacy rights and national security concerns.