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

Google Home

home.google.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

421–430 of 468 posts

Re: Google Home

#421

Post by pacala »

dguaraglia wrote: post #291
Analemma_ wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This entire keynote just keeps highlighting that one sentence from the end of Maciej's wonderful http://idlewords.com/talks/internet_with_a_human_face.htm "Yesterday ... I realized how long it had been since I looked at a new technology with wonder, instead of an automatic feeling of dread." EDIT: Speaking of Maciej, if you're not already following him on Twitter, today is the day to do that. He's having a field day…

I'm amazed that people still feel this level of paranoia about stuff, when they have a clear option: do not use the product. Concerned about the privacy implication of Google Home? Don't get one. Don't like the fact that Apple Watch reads biometric data? Get a Casio watch. Don't like the fact that Facebook knows who your friends are? Go out more. The very fact that someone is watching the keynote and going "oh my Gaw…

Google Home crosses yet another line. It installs an always on far field microphone connected to Google in a house near me. Not getting one is no longer sufficient to keep my spoken words outside of Google's reach.

This is the same as "if you don't want to be tracked by Google online, don't use Google Search", which conveniently omits that Google is working hard to add a tracking beacon on every page on the internet, via AdSense and +1 button.

StreetView, being tagged in photos by friends even if I don't use Google Photos. I also have a number of reasons to believe Google is homing in most people location information from Android phones without their informed and explicit consent.

Google's privacy practices are very questionable. Google could do better than hide under "don't use Google". What ever happened to "Don't be evil?".

Re: Google Home

#422

Post by visarga »

amelius wrote: post #207
mbrock wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Free Software Foundation, in its texts, often uses the phrase "the free world" to mean the realm of computing without proprietary restrictions, surveillance, etc. Approximately since Snowden, I've become more and more convinced about both the fragility and the value of this free world. And today, I basically see the tech giants as colossal enemies. Career-wise, henceforth I will avoid proprietary systems and dedi…

But do you think that free software can keep up against these giants? In the near future, it will all be about having large amounts of data, and processing power; it will be less and less about the actual algorithms. I'm afraid the only way out will be to rethink the economy.

> In the near future, it will all be about having large amounts of data, and processing power;

Deep Learning doesn't actually require "Big Data". They went from thousands of examples to millions or billions, but we can scrape that kind of data with open source tools, record with cheap cameras, sensors, etc.

Also, there is a lot of research into scaling big models to small hardware. We can run pretty decent AI on cell phones and small systems.

Third, the AI academic research community is pretty open and posts everything, often including code and datasets. This enables rapid progress, but essentially, it brings knowledge in the public domain. We need that to continue in order to have access to the best algorithms.

It will be much easier than you think to have open source implementations of the best AI tools.

Re: Google Home

#423

Post by Kluny »

Kristine1975 wrote: post #358
supster wrote: post #341

Earlier quoted context omitted.

laundry would be great too :-)

I have a washing machine for that :-)

I want a robot that takes my clothes out and hangs them on the line, and is able to distinguish the few items I put in the dryer (socks, undies, towels, sheets).

Re: Google Home

#424

Post by EGreg »

dragonwriter wrote: post #414
pmlnr wrote: post #391

Earlier quoted context omitted.

em... the only thing that is valid to support end-to-end encryption is the end client. Otherwise it's not end-to-end.

Yes, and the end clients many people have been using don't support end-to-end encryption. So, we haven't all been using a e2e encrypted system already. We've been using a system over which e2e can be layered, and very few have been layering that over it. And many using it in a way where even with an e2e protocol, it wouldn't be secure, since they are using an third-party, remotely provided client that can be changed…

Well um, if you have an open protocol then instead of a monoculture you have many different clients, and you can't expectto CONTROL all of them and what they do. That's the whole point you are making in the first place. The irony is if you have true freedom and openness on all levels then you also can't control the tools that don't maximize their users' freedom/security/whatever so users of those tools are still locked in.

But YOU can choose to use what you want. And IT can choose to require certain things of those it communicates with. And now you're right back to less freedom in the name of more freedom, hehe.

Re: Google Home

#425

Post by sf_rob »

tamana wrote: post #282
sf_rob wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean, all the turn-key stuff is terrible right now, but I've seen some awesome DIY stuff with Homeseer + IFTTT + bash scripts. My friend's house turns on the front porch light when he gets home, auto-locks the front door if unlocked for more than X minutes, alerts of outside doors that have been open for more than X seconds, dims the lights when he turns on the TV, alerts him when his wife is almost home (she hates…

Why does his wife let him track her movements?

It's more playful annoyance. It's only when she gets within wifi range, but he lives in the country and repeaters across his property.

Re: Google Home

#426

Post by ryandrake »

fauigerzigerk wrote: post #392
dguaraglia wrote: post #291

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm amazed that people still feel this level of paranoia about stuff, when they have a clear option: do not use the product. Concerned about the privacy implication of Google Home? Don't get one. Don't like the fact that Apple Watch reads biometric data? Get a Casio watch. Don't like the fact that Facebook knows who your friends are? Go out more. The very fact that someone is watching the keynote and going "oh my Gaw…

You are indeed missing something important. We can choose not to use a particular product. But we cannot choose not to use all the products everyone else is using, because that would make us lonely, antisocial hermits without the slightest chance of ever finding work, friends or lovers. So even if Googlers may find it "amazing" that privacy advocates don't just shut up and go live behind a rock, that's what you're go…

> We can choose not to use a particular product. But we cannot choose not to use all the products everyone else is using, because that would make us lonely, antisocial hermits without the slightest chance of ever finding work, friends or lovers.

I don't use Facebook, Twitter, WhatsApp, etc. etc. etc., you name it. Yet, somehow I am employed, have friends and hobbies, and am happily married. How could that have possibly happened?

Re: Google Home

#427

Post by fizzbatter »

nysska wrote: post #374
fizzbatter wrote: post #248

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yea, i hear the API is quite good - i should have been more clear, it sounds like for me the main blocker is the trigger word. But yea, what i would want is to literally take all input from the Echo, have amazon/echo transcribe it to text, and then send it to my code. Echo would then read the english response back.

Sorry, I might be totally off the base here but why not use IBM Watson for that? It's free for a thousand minutes in a month and it's speech-to-text looks quite good on the first glance. I was just looking around for a custom solution to have something listening, send it off somewhere to get the text out of the voice command and then respond to keywords/contexts with appropriate custom-made actions. All you need then…

No idea, does IBM Watson have a good in-home hardware device?

I'm not talking about using Echo to do any complex work, i want echo to just be my middle man taking in speech and sending my program the text. With of course, a customizable wake word.

I wasn't aware of IBM Watson having an Echo or Home like device. If it matches my needs, i'm very interested :)

Re: Google Home

#428

Post by madmax96 »

ap22213 wrote: post #318
endgame wrote: post #266

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> (Sorry for this quasi-manifestoish tone...) Don't be. I think it was very well said, and while I've been a bit of a Free Software hippie for a while it keeps hitting me over and over just how far ahead they saw.

It's amazing to me that free software is still strong after all of these years. I can remember back in the early 90s being fed propaganda from my college professors about "the communist" Stallman and his friends. They had made plenty of enemies back then and countless more since. Yet, they kept to their principles and moved things forward to the benefit of billions of people.

Nevermind the fact that most researchers hardly ever publish their source code, and often when they do it won't build on anyone else's machines.

Re: Google Home

#429

Post by madmax96 »

TeMPOraL wrote: post #249
reitanqild wrote: post #222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> In the near future, it will all be about having large amounts of data, and processing power; I don't think we are even close to the limits if what we can reach with standard desktop and server software.

I agree. The current trend of outsourcing everything to "the cloud" is partially fashion, partially laziness, and mostly dictated by business models - why do something the right way (from engineering point of view), when you can lock your users up in your own garden and extract rent (either directly, or by spamming them with ads and selling their data)? Our devices have incredible amount of computing power now - a gr…

While I agree with your assessment, there is an engineering advantage to the cloud: you don't have to deal with as many different system configurations, some of which result in a broken application and an angry customer. The functional package manager approach (like Guix) seems to solve this problem.

Re: Google Home

#430

Post by dagss »

ryandrake wrote: post #426
fauigerzigerk wrote: post #392

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are indeed missing something important. We can choose not to use a particular product. But we cannot choose not to use all the products everyone else is using, because that would make us lonely, antisocial hermits without the slightest chance of ever finding work, friends or lovers. So even if Googlers may find it "amazing" that privacy advocates don't just shut up and go live behind a rock, that's what you're go…

> We can choose not to use a particular product. But we cannot choose not to use all the products everyone else is using, because that would make us lonely, antisocial hermits without the slightest chance of ever finding work, friends or lovers. I don't use Facebook, Twitter, WhatsApp, etc. etc. etc., you name it. Yet, somehow I am employed, have friends and hobbies, and am happily married. How could that have possib…

You happened to be born before those tools were invented. Question at hand is how life will be for those growing up now.
Post reply on HN