Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is actually a pretty interesting question about threat models. A lot of "it can listen" fears are inconsistent with "I carry a smartphone", but I do think there's a meaningful distinction. My expectation isn't secrecy , but it is privacy . I carry a smartphone, but I keep voice-command activation turned off. I'm sure it could be activated remotely, but I expect that would require a targeted effort. I assume that…
So how is an Echo different from your smartphone? It feels like you've failed to quantify that. It's much easier to turn off voice-command activation on the Echo than your smartphone. The Echo is not constantly recording. > I assume that Google isn't constantly recording everything in the vicinity of all Android phones AHAHAHAHAHAHA, see for example: https://www.google.com/maps/timeline The vast majority of Android u…
The difference is that a smartphone has the ability to constantly listen, but an Echo's primary use-case is to constantly listen. So if you're going to turn off voice-command activation on an Echo, there's much less reason to own an Echo in the first place than there is to own a smartphone with voice-command activation disabled.
Furthermore, an Echo is constantly plugged into essentially limitless power, while a phone is not. People in general are much more likely to notice excessive power consumption on their smartphone from the fact that their battery would drain more quickly than usual. Whereas, not many people are directly monitoring the power usage of their plugged-in Echo on a daily basis, so they'd be much less likely to notice if their Echo is suddenly using more power than usual (for example, by being remotely activated to listen constantly).
> AHAHAHAHAHAHA, see for example: https://www.google.com/maps/timeline The vast majority of Android users I've met unknowingly had this enabled. It doesn't record your conversations, but it still records far more than an Echo.
Granted, but there is no built-in voice command to send your timeline to one of your contacts.
> Why would remotely enabling recording on your Android phone be more difficult than on an Echo?
It's not that one is more difficult than the other, but rather that your risk grows with the number of possible attack vectors. If I already own a smartphone, then I may already be at risk, but adding an Echo to the mix increases my risk.
Two channels for remote listening will always be more risky than one. I don't think anyone is suggesting that you can replace your smartphone with an Echo, so the discussion about the risk of an Echo will always be within the context of _adding_ to the risk of having a smartphone. I don't think it's surprising when someone draws the line between the thing they currently rely on and the additional thing they can live without.