Live data from Hacker News

NH judge orders Amazon to give Echo recordings in murder case

wmur.com

121–130 of 185 posts

Re: NH judge orders Amazon to give Echo recordings in murder case

#121
post #41
post #6

I know that this article itself doesn’t have much content but I’m interested in what the police are actually requesting, and what they end up getting. Do they assume/suspect that Echo/Amazon continuously records and logs audio, akin to a security camera? Or do they have evidence that Echo was actually activated around the time of the murders, or afterwards by the suspect himself? I was also interested in this quote:…

I sincerely doubt people don't realise that anything after the trigger is sent home, since a "feature" of alexa is that the app let you see each request you made, how alexa answered, and let them know if she got it wrong. I think it's more a case of "don't care" / "don't realize the risks"

A surprisingly large part of the population is completely oblivious to all of this and they don’t care unless the effects are so directly in their faces they can no longer ignore it.

Re: NH judge orders Amazon to give Echo recordings in murder case

#122

> Sorry, this content is not available in your region. Aka: "We're not gonna adhere to privacy shit."

Or "we're not interested in being regulated by a foreign government".

Is there such thing as foreign in the internet? Can you choose to just not adhere to a law that protects the users? If the law was unfair it would be fair to resist, though.

Re: NH judge orders Amazon to give Echo recordings in murder case

#123
post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are mistaken. The utility of Alexa/Google Home is worth any privacy intrusion for me. I simply don't care. Convince me otherwise.

Though the person is being a slight jerk with the last sentence in this comment, there's no reason to mass-downvote someone just because they don't value their privacy as much as anyone else. The poster is not telling people they should not value privacy, only that the poster does not in exchange for utility.

[deleted]

Re: NH judge orders Amazon to give Echo recordings in murder case

#124
post #72
post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What is it that users don’t realize? You answered yourself in an exemplary fashion, but I'll state it explicitly (and simply). People don't think about it. I'd like to imagine anyone who realises the implications of owning such a device would refuse to own one, although I know I'm mistaken. I don't mean that people should know better (although ofc they should), but new technology is all too easily likened to any ho…

You are mistaken. The utility of Alexa/Google Home is worth any privacy intrusion for me. I simply don't care. Convince me otherwise.

Statitstics and non-biased double blind emphereal fictitious studies show that those who don't care about privacy, usually have not fully developed privacy awareness intelligence due to social constrictions nominally developed during the abstraction formance and concretion phase of the multi-hemispherical expansion of the brain. Often, this leads to higher overall social acceptance, integration, and adjustment- with loss of self awareness and self identity,giving over completely to the social hive mind indications and constructs, usually producing characteristics similiar to, but not nearly as developed as, the common bee, with hyponitic driven intelligence and pre-defined scripted actions produced from the social feedback loop of the group. Privacy is then regards as a trivial concept, as the social feedback never identifies individual self actions, rather group activity motions to accomplish group goals, not individual self goals. Integration of personal self into the hive is almost impossible because to be part of the hive one must sacrifice the self and individualism , conversely, the hive cannot exist as a individual only a selfless group of commonality- it cannot bee otherwise.(please forgive the pun)

Re: NH judge orders Amazon to give Echo recordings in murder case

#125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It has been demonstrated that it does not send network traffic apart from requests made to it; e.g. it is not continuously streaming data. Of course that could be changed at any time with a software update that you have no choice about accepting. To prove it is not recording locally could be much more difficult, but there are practical questions there. What media is it recording to, and if the recordings are never se…

That does not demonstrate anything. It could "buffer" the data it wants to send and only send it after the trigger word is detected, precisely to trick such naive analysis.

That would result in a much larger payload, and a payload size that is variable depending on how long it has been, and how much audio was record-able between requests. But if instead we observe a small payload of constant size given the same request, regardless of how long between requests, then we can reasonably be assured the device is not doing this.

Re: NH judge orders Amazon to give Echo recordings in murder case

#126

Can you replace the link with this one? https://apnews.com/ebe802c103d64412aaef707e8719e946 The existing link is a spamfest.

The existing link is also blocked in Germany. Your link, however, functions.

rather i guess the site is blocking access from europe because of the GDPR

Re: NH judge orders Amazon to give Echo recordings in murder case

#129
post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are mistaken. The utility of Alexa/Google Home is worth any privacy intrusion for me. I simply don't care. Convince me otherwise.

Though the person is being a slight jerk with the last sentence in this comment, there's no reason to mass-downvote someone just because they don't value their privacy as much as anyone else. The poster is not telling people they should not value privacy, only that the poster does not in exchange for utility.

I think they have been massively downvoted because they were being a jerk, not because they (don't) value their privacy.

Re: NH judge orders Amazon to give Echo recordings in murder case

#130
post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As are ships. But we still often say she.

I think using pronouns reserved for humans on a ship (engineered mass of wood/metal that doesn't spy on you and you can own) is more acceptable than using it on a company (which spies on you, is not something you own, etc).

Good luck lecturing people what to call things...
Post reply on HN