Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Terrifyingly Convenient

slate.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 43 posts

Re: Terrifyingly Convenient

#31

Post by Godel_unicode »

greenyoda wrote: post #29
massysett wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree with you on the people who buy these things, but I think a more interesting question is how they affect the people who do not buy them. Facebook is similar. I don't care one whit about Facebook users who complain that the company is using their information and that they have no privacy. That's what you signed up for, duh. More interesting is that Facebook amasses a lot of information even about people who do…

"Right now the Echo is only listening inside of homes, so logically you can figure there's not much risk of third-party harm here." If I visit a friend who has an Echo in their home, I'm having my conversation listened to without my consent.

I wonder if we're going to start seeing a new norm (similar to "I have you on speaker, Jane is here too") around devices with always-on voice recognition?

You head over to your friends house and they hit the mute button on their way to the door, or ask Alexa to say hi.

Re: Terrifyingly Convenient

#32

Post by itsyogesh »

greenyoda wrote: post #28
yjisawesome wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So what you are suggesting this trend will be perfect as long as we control like keeping private home network? What a novel idea!!! However, in order for startup to be interested, this idea gotta have some commercial potential aka profitable. How do make this idea profitable though?

Not all innovation comes from startups. There are probably lots of people who would be interested in working on a free, open source AI system if someone were to organize such a project. It would be interesting to see who the "Linus Torvalds of AI" will turn out to be.

Just to add to the fact, GNU already created an open source neural network platform. (https://www.gnu.org/software/gneuralnetwork/)

Re: Terrifyingly Convenient

#33

Post by theoh »

mst wrote: post #3

The most interesting thing from my POV was the existence of http://x.ai/

It's a shame they didn't minimally push the boat out for sexual equality by offering "adam" as a male alternative. Amy is (arguably) a stereotypically girly name and given that what's being offloaded here is administrative work, I think it looks bad to make it a female responsibility.

Re: Terrifyingly Convenient

#34

Post by massysett »

greenyoda wrote: post #29
massysett wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree with you on the people who buy these things, but I think a more interesting question is how they affect the people who do not buy them. Facebook is similar. I don't care one whit about Facebook users who complain that the company is using their information and that they have no privacy. That's what you signed up for, duh. More interesting is that Facebook amasses a lot of information even about people who do…

"Right now the Echo is only listening inside of homes, so logically you can figure there's not much risk of third-party harm here." If I visit a friend who has an Echo in their home, I'm having my conversation listened to without my consent.

If you're in someone else's home you have to assume he has listening devices. He controls his house.

Re: Terrifyingly Convenient

#35

Post by dima55 »

rodgerd wrote: post #27
GuiA wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You'll never be alone again Or, if this bothers you, you can choose to avoid the hedonistic treadmill altogether and not outfit your house with an Alexa, a Kinect, and countless other mostly useless devices that people lived happily without 10 years ago.

The problem with this nice theory is you'll be getting it whether you want it or not. As revenue comes in from the sureillance society, manufacturers will (and alrewady are) crammin the functionality into devices. You, as a customer will have no choice: sooner or later you'll need a new fridge, and a spy fridge will be your only option.

That is simply not true. Maybe the latest and hipsteriest devices will all have those features, but the market is vast and caters to all sorts of humans and price points. You just have to care enough to make that choice as a consumer.

Re: Terrifyingly Convenient

#36

Post by MaysonL »

aftbit wrote: post #8

"When I Google “kinkajou,” I get a list of websites, ranked according to an algorithm that takes into account all sorts of factors that correlate with relevance and authority. I choose the information source I prefer, then visit its website directly—an experience that could help to further shade or inform my impression of its trustworthiness." While the Google experience is certainly more direct than the Alexa experi…

Ah, the "filter bubble". It became terrifyingly real to me when I read a blog post by Dave Winer exulting in the fact that his "Fargo" program had reached the first page of Google results. When I googled it, his program was nowhere to be found on the first few pages. Hmm… I now use DuckDuckGo for most of my searching, and !g for almost all of the rest.

Re: Terrifyingly Convenient

#37

Post by nitrogen »

BatFastard wrote: post #18
futureiswithus wrote: post #14

I always had imagined this convinient future to be about an intelligence that lived within my home and not a remote server farm. That way everyone had their own personal AI that grew with you and not connected to any others. There was no big brother since it wasnt centralized. Why cant a startup be formed to make this real?

So you can get voice recognition at home, but you end up losing updates, new features, and ability to interoperate with other services. Cloud based services make it so that one person doesn't have to carry this load themselves.

Standardization makes it so that nobody has to carry this load themselves.

Re: Terrifyingly Convenient

#38

Post by nkurz »

theoh wrote: post #33
mst wrote: post #3

The most interesting thing from my POV was the existence of http://x.ai/

It's a shame they didn't minimally push the boat out for sexual equality by offering "adam" as a male alternative. Amy is (arguably) a stereotypically girly name and given that what's being offloaded here is administrative work, I think it looks bad to make it a female responsibility.

The posted article suggests that they already do allow this: Unlike some other intelligent assistant companies, X.ai gives you the option to choose a male name for your assistant instead: Mine is Andrew Ingram.

Re: Terrifyingly Convenient

#39

Post by r00fus »

dima55 wrote: post #35
rodgerd wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem with this nice theory is you'll be getting it whether you want it or not. As revenue comes in from the sureillance society, manufacturers will (and alrewady are) crammin the functionality into devices. You, as a customer will have no choice: sooner or later you'll need a new fridge, and a spy fridge will be your only option.

That is simply not true. Maybe the latest and hipsteriest devices will all have those features, but the market is vast and caters to all sorts of humans and price points. You just have to care enough to make that choice as a consumer.

Try to buy a high-end TV without Wifi/Smart/3D useless anti-features.

It's getting harder each day.

Re: Terrifyingly Convenient

#40

Post by hinkley »

pdkl95 wrote: post #13
jveld wrote: post #7

Enough with the 'woe humanity the machines are coming' pieces. After ten years of facebook, and three years of snowden leaks, I have a hard time finding sympathy for people who purchase 'smart' (read data gathering ) devices from large conglomerates before considering the privacy implications. The cards are on the table; we all know what the terms of this kind of convenience are. If you're concerned for your privacy,…

You seem to believe that everybody somehow knows the consequences of "opting in". Does everyone have a CS degree in your universe? > we all know what the terms of this kind of convenience are Most people have no idea whatsoever what those terms are. Even among technical crowds I still find people assuming that humans are required for various tasks that have been automated for a long time. I seriously don't understand…

Hell, I'm the biggest cynic in most rooms, I border on diabolically clever when the mood grabs me, and I don't have the slightest clue what the actual consequences of opting in are.

But if the deal is too good to be true, it's only because you don't have all the facts. Information asymmetry is the very basis for capitalism.

Post reply on HN