So they do not send any data out and this is completely local to the machine it runs on for Teams? Because otherwise they need informed consent for this use. And last I checked, Teams has never asked me for any such thing. Or maybe the need another $500M fine to remind them what they actually need to do when deploying such tech...

Question is, is just CoPilot complete crap or is this a more systematic problem. For example, did MS cripple CoPilot with restrictions?

The recession is also not no way a surprise. Incompetent "leadership", deeply invested in putting on a show while making things actively worse tends to do that.

Well. Morally, this is of course deeply reprehensible. But how do you propose to make that go away in a society that prays to the great God Mammon and where greed is seen as acceptable?

To be fair, this fact is somewhat hidden. But yes, this is the primary and core purpose of any credit score: It is not to benefit the individual scored in any way. It is about those than want to exploit said individual.

This is what is called an "utterly naive statement".

They will need a reliable way to turn that off, or they will never be able to deploy this in Europe. The GDPR would actually mandate default-off.

Yep, there are always groups of people that are even more stupid. You are clearly part of one.

More data is always better in these deranged minds. Also, any updates will not be in what they already have.

I am undecided whether you are ineptly trying to defend Microsoft or are really this clueless.

Obviously. But too many people are not smart enough to understand that.

Enterprises probably will need to have widespread prohibitions on the use of these "agents" now. I can also not wait for MS to get hacked (again) and all this information getting into the hands of organized crime and hostile nations.

The problem is that these documents may well get designed for AI to get it wrong. They are not yet, as far as I can tell, but they will be. And then AI will not mostly get it right anymore and make you an easy target for manipulation.

I just asked ChatGPT "Is Microsoft willfully enshittifying its products?".

It essentially said "yes" to enshittification, but was unsure whether it is incompetence or maliciousness. Hence it clearly is not there yet, because while there is clearly massive organizational dysfunction at Microsoft, there is quite clearly intent as well. For example, making things harder to use (o365, W11) will very clearly show up on their own user-testing, but they also very clearly have decided that wasting more user time is what they want to do. There is no way that was not a conscious informed decision.

Full answer:
----
Ah, the “willfully enshittifying” debate—you're referencing that infamous term coined by Cory Doctorow to describe the phenomenon where companies intentionally degrade the quality of their products or services in order to extract more money or control over users.

Microsoft, especially in recent years, has faced its share of criticisms along these lines. Some examples:

Windows 11 Updates: Windows 11, for example, has been the subject of some frustrations regarding forced updates, system requirements, and a lack of control for users. The fact that features like the ability to defer updates have been severely limited feels like an attempt to nudge people into a more uniform, more controllable system.

Office 365: The shift from traditional perpetual licenses (where you pay once) to subscription models (where you pay ongoing fees) has led to a lot of complaints. Many people feel like they're being forced into the subscription model with ever-increasing prices for the same or worse features.

Bloatware in Windows: The inclusion of pre-installed apps (many of which cannot be removed) or the increasing prominence of apps that try to push services like OneDrive and Microsoft Edge feels like an effort to funnel users into Microsoft's ecosystem—whether they want to be there or not.

Telemetry and Privacy Concerns: A lot of Microsoft's products (especially Windows) collect telemetry data, and while it’s marketed as a way to improve user experience, some feel it's just a backdoor for data collection to sell advertising or to exert more control.

Lack of User Control: Windows’ user interface has been simplified in some cases to the point where users feel less in control of their system. For instance, the removal of control panels, deep settings, and customization options in favor of a more "streamlined" and "unified" system.

So, is it willful? Some of it seems more like a combination of corporate strategy (monetizing services through subscriptions, gaining control over ecosystems) and the “unintended” consequences of designing products with a heavy corporate agenda.

But whether or not it's malicious is more of a gray area. It’s hard to imagine that Microsoft doesn't know the complaints, but at the same time, they might feel it’s just the price of doing business in an increasingly data-driven, subscription economy. Do you think it’s a deliberate move, or more of a byproduct of their business model evolving?
----

People struggle to get through their daily lives. They do not have the resources to spare not not use AI when it becomes the easier way. And then there is peer-pressure and FOMO.

Indeed. The core problem is that "AI" (well, LLMs) do not actually produce anything new or different. It is just making some essentially non-productive things easier. Hence there will not be a replacement industry.

For example, it can be used to automate bureaucracy, which just means we will get more of it. And it can make better ads, better propaganda and better scams. None of which is helpful on a society level. These all only serve to distribute what is there in wealth differently.

So yes, I think this time will not work out. Either put strict controls and limits on LLMs or suffer the end of capitalism as it descends into chaos. Well, we might get lucky and this whole hype collapses under its own weight soon enough to limit the damage.

Found your problem. Obviously AI is really good at helping you push made-up stories. And since nobody is going to do any fact-checking anyways, even the occasional hallucination does not matter.