318 karma · joined March 16, 2017
I figured someone was working on this but it’s so refreshing to read about the thought and level of detail that went into your design. What an effort too! Congratulations transit team, you all should be so proud for solving what I’d imagine is one of transit’s largest small gripes.
This seems like it could be abused pretty easily. Not necessarily insecure but I could get a lot of spam no?
https://workspace.google.com/resources/appointment-schedulin...
> The Company will retain Your Personal Data only for as long as is necessary for the purposes set out in this Privacy Policy.
And the privacy policy essentially provides for every purpose they would want to use your data. Sharing, for example:
> With Affiliates: We may share Your information with Our affiliates, in which case we will require those affiliates to honor this Privacy Policy. Affiliates include Our parent company and any other subsidiaries, joint venture partners or other companies that We control or that are under common control with Us.
> With business partners: We may share Your information with Our business partners to offer You certain products, services or promotions.
Pretty egregious.
Some of the more egregious ones I found:
Regarding using a social media provider to log in.
> We may collect Personal data that is already associated with Your Third-Party Social Media Service's account, such as Your name, Your email address, Your activities or Your contact list associated with that account.
Kind of a given if you’re logging in with a social media provider but still.
Regarding collection of your location.
> While using Our Application, in order to provide features of Our Application, We may collect, with Your prior permission: Information regarding your location. We use this information to provide features of Our Service, to improve and customize Our Service. The information may be uploaded to the Company's servers and/or a Service Provider's server or it may be simply stored on Your device.
Regarding sharing of your data.
> With Affiliates: We may share Your information with Our affiliates, in which case we will require those affiliates to honor this Privacy Policy. Affiliates include Our parent company and any other subsidiaries, joint venture partners or other companies that We control or that are under common control with Us.
> With business partners: We may share Your information with Our business partners to offer You certain products, services or promotions.
How we use your data section basically says we use it for everything and share it with everyone.
My parents oven gets regular software updates so I didn’t even question whether the cigarette lighter was “smart.”
That said, if you look up the best practices and use the very specific language / processes that the DCAs are looking for, you should be able to get approved with little effort.
Some things I’ve learned, in no particular order:
— If your provider (e.g. Twilio) has specific language they advise you include on a form / website / etc., use that exact language verbatim.
— For forms where you collect a phone number, have the compliance text very visible, perhaps even sacrificing UI/UX. After your campaign is approved, you can clean it up.
— Make sure you include your business / project name & opt-out instructions (reply STOP) in every sample message you submit for the campaign.
— Stick to the use case you selected & do not deviate. Make sure your campaign details align with the campaign description.
— Marketing-related campaigns — avoid if at all possible.
A better way to convey this might be that LLMs are good at being conversational and given the appropriate context and guardrails, they can regurgitate knowledge from said context with reasonable accuracy.
Google’s mishaps (eating rocks, etc.) demonstrate there’s still quite a bit of work to do for this to work at scale, but the tech is still pretty good.
I do think some of the underlying technologies have merit in certain areas, but imo they’re mostly in customer service/success where actual agents are overburdened and thus can’t provide a good customer experience. Knowledge regurgitation is something current tech (LLMs) are good at, so to me this makes sense. Feels like in the longer term more technical functions will start to work better once reasoning becomes better.
The math works out when I think about it but for some reason I’m still floored by the fact that $12 only gets you 10 pages of paper for an entire year.