“Alexa, play some music” isn’t the only time Amazon is listening to you.

[tthurman]

https://medium.com/swlh/alexa-play-some-music-isnt-the-only-time-amazon-is-listening-to-you-a556df19613f

[Draco1962]

https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/security/your-smart-tv-watching-you-watching-tv-consumer-reports-finds-n845456

https://www.cnbc.com/2017/03/09/if-you-have-a-smart-tv-take-a-closer-look-at-your-privacy-settings.html

[tthurman]

I think I'm more okay with data mining/analytics than outright eavesdropping.

[RIP-Felix]

ouch...I'm intellectually and emotionally conflicted on this one.

I have 4 echos...and like them. I knew off the bat they were collecting more than just my responses and could be abused. I guess I wanted the convenience of automating my lights, music, and timers. I'm the first to admit my total hypocrisy. I'm outspoken about hating data mining and analytics, while inviting smart bulbs and echo spying devices into my living/bedroom.

I think the reason this one is so hard for me, is that I really do like the services voice recognition provides. It's more convenient than a remote or app for controlling lights. "Alexa, bedtime" and the lights go off. "Alexa, wake me up at 5:30" and she sets an alarm. "Alexa, set a timer for 4 minutes" instead of navigating the menu to set a timer on the microwave. "Alexa, resume audiobook" and she resumes Ready Player One on Audible where I left off in my Car via bluetooth to my phone a few minutes earlier. "Alexa, play electronic for studying on Pandora", "Alexa, how do you spell [insert that word you can't get close enough for spellcheck to recognize]", and so on... It's just way more difficult to give up. I have no desire to view more relevant ads in Firefox, so I can easily block them. But alexa is different. I like what she offers me...But more than privacy? Sigh...

I have a hard time believing it's really that bad. While there exists a potential for abuse and human error. Emotionally, I want to believe Amazon is sincere in their desire to respect user Privacy. Intellectually, I'm not naive enough to believe they won't sell us out.

Having said that, however...and this is going to be bias by my desire to keep using echo devices...I doubt anyone is actually listening outside the times it thinks it heard the wake word. While it may technically be possable to activate recording, it would require someone delibratly breaking the law to do so. I'm not likly worth the effort, so I'm not too worried about it. I agree with one of the readers who commented, "if you ask alexa for a weather report while having sex, I think the privacy implications should be less of a concern than the relationship implications." Another commenter pointed out that Apple store less data, keeping siri recordings for a period of 6-18 months, and anonymizes it. Amazon, by contrast, stores non-anonymous user data and keeps recordings for an indefinite period of time. So, I guess the lesson is it's prudent to choose an assistant from a company with better privacy policies.

[tthurman]

Concession of privacy for convenience ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[DazzleHP]

On 1/15/2019 at 2:03 AM, RIP-Felix said:

ouch...I'm intellectually and emotionally conflicted on this one.

I have 4 echos...and like them. I knew off the bat they were collecting more than just my responses and could be abused. I guess I wanted the convenience of automating my lights, music, and timers. I'm the first to admit my total hypocrisy. I'm outspoken about hating data mining and analytics, while inviting smart bulbs and echo spying devices into my living/bedroom.

I think the reason this one is so hard for me, is that I really do like the services voice recognition provides. It's more convenient than a remote or app for controlling lights. "Alexa, bedtime" and the lights go off. "Alexa, wake me up at 5:30" and she sets an alarm. "Alexa, set a timer for 4 minutes" instead of navigating the menu to set a timer on the microwave. "Alexa, resume audiobook" and she resumes Ready Player One on Audible where I left off in my Car via bluetooth to my phone a few minutes earlier. "Alexa, play electronic for studying on Pandora", "Alexa, how do you spell [insert that word you can't get close enough for spellcheck to recognize]", and so on... It's just way more difficult to give up. I have no desire to view more relevant ads in Firefox, so I can easily block them. But alexa is different. I like what she offers me...But more than privacy? Sigh...

I have a hard time believing it's really that bad. While there exists a potential for abuse and human error. Emotionally, I want to believe Amazon is sincere in their desire to respect user Privacy. Intellectually, I'm not naive enough to believe they won't sell us out.

Having said that, however...and this is going to be bias by my desire to keep using echo devices...I doubt anyone is actually listening outside the times it thinks it heard the wake word. While it may technically be possable to activate recording, it would require someone delibratly breaking the law to do so. I'm not likly worth the effort, so I'm not too worried about it. I agree with one of the readers who commented, "if you ask alexa for a weather report while having sex, I think the privacy implications should be less of a concern than the relationship implications." Another commenter pointed out that Apple store less data, keeping siri recordings for a period of 6-18 months, and anonymizes it. Amazon, by contrast, stores non-anonymous user data and keeps recordings for an indefinite period of time. So, I guess the lesson is it's prudent to choose an assistant from a company with better privacy policies.

This is how mass surveillance has become a thing, because you would rather be lazy than diligent. You actually just said you would rather be monitored, day in day out, instead of making some effort not to be. That is a scary mindset if you ask me.

Honestly it astounds me how quick people are willing to give up every aspect of theirs lives because of likes and "friends".

Hate to break it to ya, but none of those people are your friends.

 

[Draco1962]

Alexa - let's play a game...

https://www.cnet.com/news/amazon-alexa-st-noire-x2-games-nolan-bushnell-zai-ortiz-atari-chuck-e-cheese-murder-mystery/

Looks like the founder of Atari and Chuck-E-Cheese is cashing in on the Alexa craze.

[RIP-Felix]

On 1/16/2019 at 4:12 PM, DazzleHP said:

This is how mass surveillance has become a thing, because you would rather be lazy than diligent. You actually just said you would rather be monitored, day in day out, instead of making some effort not to be. That is a scary mindset if you ask me.

Honestly it astounds me how quick people are willing to give up every aspect of theirs lives because of likes and "friends".

Hate to break it to ya, but none of those people are your friends.

Most people relinquish some security for convenience. We can't all have a moat filled with electric eels and hippopotomus', steel reinforced concrete bunkers with 10foot thick walls and nuclear blast proof war doors. Probably more than the expense, the inconvenience of living that way is untenable. While it's surely less secure, a deadbolt suits my needs. If that doesn't cut it, law enforcement and community will - for the greater number anyway. We form community and Law for the purpose of security and privacy. That's your best chance of survival in a disaster, seek out others and work together (not that lone wolf crap Hollywood likes to dramatize).

Sure, technically echo devices could be used to "listen" in the home. TV's and appliances are starting to go down this path now too. My new TV just made me agree to their TV analytics as a precondition of use. What am I going to do, take it back? Nope, because there isn't much I can do about that. It seems everyone is making us implicitly agree to their privacy policy by continued use. What exactly does my TV have access to? Can it send video of whatever is displayed on it? My gaming consoles? Or computer? Do I just have to "trust" this is not a very likely privacy liability? Sort of. We don't have to "trust" it wont be used in that way, we have to make it not worth the penalty. Law is the deterrent. Being completely normal and uninteresting is your protection. 

The litmus test is the smart phone sitting in your pocket. It goes with you everywhere, has forward and rear facing cameras, biometrics, accelerometers, wifi and cellular network connections, as well as GPS. If you use a smart phone, you're like most people - willing to sacrifice some security and privacy for convenience and other services. How is Alexa different?

[DazzleHP]

37 minutes ago, RIP-Felix said:

Sure, technically echo devices could be used to "listen" in the home. We have to "trust" it wont be used in that way. TV's and appliances are starting to go down this path now too. My new TV just made me agree to their TV analytics as a precondition of use. What am I going to do, take it back? Nope, because there isn't much I can do about that. It seems everyone is making us implicitly agree to their privacy policy by continued use. What exactly does my TV have access to? Can it send video of whatever is displayed on it? My gaming consoles? Or computer? I just have to "trust" this is not a very likely privacy liability.

The litmus test is the smart phone sitting in your pocket. It goes with you everywhere, has forward and rear facing cameras, biometrics, accelerometers, wifi and cellular network connections, as well as GPS. If you use a smart phone, you're like most people - willing to sacrifice some security and privacy for convenience and other services. How is Alexa different?

Not "technically", they do. Why do you need to trust devices that blatantly violate your privacy? So your logic is: Everything is invading my life, so therefore, i'll let everything invade my life.

[RIP-Felix]

The point is, I use the services I want. I accept the privacy policies accordingly. I may not like them, but I accept them if I want the service enough to take the risk. Otherwise I don't. Many people don't and that's good, because it makes companies respect privacy concirns in order to earn more users. True, there are alot of sheep. Probably so many that companies will do fine regardless of the policy. So unless I want to live under a rock, or go to extraordinary lengths to protect my security, I have to accept that privacy is dead.

Spoiler

The issue of mass surveillance, isn't legal court ordered violations of a criminal's privacy, it's unlawful and accidental breaches of privacy. Human error is one thing. Corporate espionage, is another. I'll admit Suppression is a real concern. These devices make it easier for Oligarchs to influence, undermine, and plot. They're more likly to be the ones who make the product too, especially if antitrust laws keep allowing monopolies to eat up more and more tech companies.

• Find a cell phone without a camera, wifi, GPS, biometrics and so on. It's not that easy. And even if you do, can you trust the phone company isn't tracing/triangulating or listening to your calls? Or some criminal working for the phone company?
• The NSA is building gigantic data warehouses to DVR the internet, decrypt and watch it 2 years later. You think only the NSA can do this? So you'd pretty much have to discontinue use of the internet entirely unless  you buy a VPN and stick to the dark net to route/encrypt your internet traffic. You could choose one that doesn't store user data, so it can't be stolen or subpoenaed. It would need to be located in a country that is privacy friendly. This does exist. But the good ones cost money. Not that much, but it adds up.
• The list goes on and on...How much convenience you are willing to pass up is up to you.

 

[Draco1962]

If we didn't assume a certain amount of risk and give away a little privacy we wouldn't be having this conversation. 

[tthurman]

I don't necessarily accept that you must live under a rock or go to extraordinary lengths to remain somewhat private in life, but acknowledge that it takes some effort if you want to remain under the radar to at least to some degree.  Anyone wishing to throw caution to the wind can do so from literally thousands of avenues that were readily prevalent in today's society way before Alexa.  

To me, there's a difference between being exploited vs somewhat willingly opening yourself to it.   When I can get up in the morning and say "Hey Jarvis, make me some coffee", I may think differently.

Regardless, it wasn't my intent, but this topic seems to be going a bit south and we are all friends here!

[Draco1962]

I was seeing it as more spirited, hopefully that is the case.

[RIP-Felix]

On 1/18/2019 at 8:20 PM, tthurman said:

 When I can get up in the morning and say "Hey Jarvis, make me some coffee", I may think differently.

Regardless, it wasn't my intent, but this topic seems to be going a bit south and we are all friends here!

I do agree with what you're saying, actually. When I got alexa I was expecting more. But the stuff I use it for is a nice convenience, especially at work. My situation may be different than yours and her limitations might make it not worth the risk for you. It's not good to just throw caution to the wind, but we cant live under a rock either. Its a ballance. A personal one.

Draco's right. This is just a spirited exchange. No ill will on my part. I too really dislike the trend of privacy mining. it's frustrating that no one seems to take it seriously. I'm just making the point that I have caved in a little. I'm not the only one and unless the trends or laws change, then we have to accept increasing privacy liability.

[Draco1962]

“Privacy isn’t about something to hide. Privacy is about something to protect. And that’s who you are. That’s what you believe in. That’s who you want to become. Privacy is the right to the self. Privacy is what gives you the ability to share with the world who you are on your own terms.”

"Arguing that you don't care about the right to privacy because you have nothing to hide, is no different than saying you don't care about free speech because you have nothing to say."

“Privacy is the fountainhead of all other rights. Freedom of speech doesn’t have a lot of meaning if you can’t have a quiet space. A space within yourself, within your mind, within the community of your friends, within your home, to decide what it is you actually want to say.”

“The common argument that we have ‘if you have nothing to hide …you have nothing to fear’– the origins of that are literally Nazi propaganda… That is literally the origin of that quote. It’s from their minister of propaganda Joseph Goebbels.  So when we hear modern politicians, when we hear modern people repeating that reflexively without confronting its origins, without confronting what it really says… that’s harmful.”

"No system of mass surveillance has existed in any society, that we know of to this point, that has not been abused."

Just a few of many quotes attributed to Edward Snowden. I can't say that I disagree with a single one, yet, I am ill-equipped to live totally "off the grid" so I have to make allowances and give away a little privacy.

[RIP-Felix]

Remember that freedom of speach is a constitutional right that only protects you legally, not socially. And it doesn't cover seditious speach or that which incites to violence. In the case of Snowden or publications releasing classified documents, it shouldn't cover them if it leads to the death of an informant or operative. If you have access to sensitive information, you have a responsibility to protect it, and are culpable if your careless action gets someone killed. Classifying shouldn't be used to cover up crimes, but it always has been. Hense whistle blowers. Again it's a balancing act between oversight and protecting sensitive information. It's a battle between privacy and security. The potential for abuse is ever present.

You can still be convicted in the court of public opinion. Just because you can't be legally deprived of your freedom, doesn't mean there aren't social consequences. Say something insensitive or stupid, even if it was an honest mistake you apologize for, and it could ruin you socially - even if there was nothing illegal about what you said. People are too quick to judge and too slow to forgive nowadays.

[Draco1962]

One of the reasons I cannot take the "PoundMeToo" movement seriously. While there are some that have committed heinous acts and should pay for their actions, others are being judged in the media just on the basis of "she said - he said bullshit" with no proof or evidence and lives are being unjustly ruined.

[tthurman]

Agreed!  It has diminished those genuinely assaulted and turned it into a media spectacle by others that are nothing more than attention whores.

 

[RIP-Felix]

A very small percentage of women coming forward are lying. That said, defamation law needs to be adjusted to include social media. The burden of proof seems to be on the one accused to prove their innocence - in the court of public opinion. Even if they can win a defamation counter-suit, in a legal courtroom, the social consequences of the accusation are worse than the penalty of defamation.

It's unlikely to happen if your a descent person, but I just stay clear of social media as much as possible regardless. Seems wrong to judge others through a phone or a single news piece.

[Draco1962]

Any percentage of deceipt is wrong and in cases where there is no clear evidence, the accuser should automatically be charged with a crime. 

[DazzleHP]

First of all "freedom of speech" only exists in the US. Those laws do not apply to Europe anymore. Secondly, "A very small percentage of women coming forward are lying" is a lie in itself. Just like the "wage gap", just like other "statistics". It's all easily debunked.

 

Something needs to happen to false accusers because they ruin lives with a free pass. Nothing happens to them, yet their accused have their lives ruined, they lose their job, their children, their family, everything! For merely an accusation. The accuser though, just carries on regardless, no charges, without a second thought on what they have done.

 

Doesn't seem right to me.

[RIP-Felix]

20 hours ago, DazzleHP said:

Secondly, "A very small percentage of women coming forward are lying" is a lie in itself. Just like the "wage gap", just like other "statistics". It's all easily debunked.

Spoiler

I ask nothing more from anyone than they do their research and decide for themselves. I tend to align with feminists on this issue. I thought this article was fair. To me this was poignant, "since records began in 1989, in the US there are only 52 cases where men convicted of sexual assault were exonerated because it turned out they were falsely accused. By way of comparison, in the same period, there are 790 cases in which people were exonerated for murder." Clearly this is a small percentage of the total number of rape convictions since 1989. To argue the opposition, that may say more about how hard it is to get a conviction overturned than it does about the true number of Innocent convictions. That may be true, it's hard to know for sure what the real number is. Even so, I doubt it's greater than the 2-10% estimated by feminist groups. No offense, I respect your right to disagree. I doubt social media will afford you the same, but they are unforgiving conformists that ride the wave of political correctness until it bites them personally. Maybe then they'll learn some humility.

False accusations hurt everyone. That's why is so important to learn the facts before jumping to conclusions. You can't believe everything you read people, especially on the internet...and where do you think social media is found? Your phone?

Note, you have to decide what information is likely to be unbiased and fair. Learn to identify good statistics and research, before dismissing everything except what you want to believe. That's the point of disinformation, to make you think there is no source of good information - to create a debate where there is none - to get people to spectate not participate - to proceed without opposition in the confusion. It's an effective form of diversion. Global warming is case in point. It's only a political and social debate, not a scientific one, so the fossil fuel business can continue as usual...and it has...for over 120 years. We became reliant on the energy provided by fossil fuels and alternatives haven't become cheap enough to compete. They continue to work against efforts that would allow alternatives to compete (like a carbon tax). Its the greatest contribution the Nazi's made to America since the moon landing, the template of bamboozling your own population into inaction.

20 hours ago, DazzleHP said:

First of all "freedom of speech" only exists in the US. Those laws do not apply to Europe anymore.

And we're heading down that same path. Scary!

[Draco1962]

Unfortunately, our media and government trust that the average person is going to leap before looking and accept what is said at face value without digging into the facts. We've become a society that demands instant gratification and wants to do as little work as possible to determine the truth.

[DazzleHP]

On 1/22/2019 at 12:26 AM, Draco1962 said:

Unfortunately, our media and government trust that the average person is going to leap before looking and accept what is said at face value without digging into the facts. We've become a society that demands instant gratification and wants to do as little work as possible to determine the truth.

Exactly. Everyone should be digging! A good start would be the article Felix linked