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

Google employees are listening to Google Home conversations

translate.google.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

351–360 of 463 posts

Re: Google employees are listening to Google Home conversations

#351

Post by drevil-v2 »

munchbunny wrote: post #331
gringoDan wrote: post #95

I think the responses to this can be broken down into a 2x2 matrix: level of concern vs. understanding of technology. 1) Don't understand ML; not concerned - "I have nothing to hide." 2) Don't understand ML; concerned - "I bought this device and now people are spying on me!" 3) Understand ML; not concerned - "Of course, Google needs to label its training data." 4) Understand ML; concerned - "How can we train models/c…

I'm perhaps in a subcategory of (3) that falls under "Understand ML; concerned". Knowing what I know about how people I have worked with have come close to or have actually mishandled data despite the best of intentions, I do not trust any of these teams without an explicit accountability mechanism that is observable by an outside entity. I'm not looking to punish slip-ups, because mistakes happen, but I am looking f…

Exactly. Having worked in teams which handle personal data of consumers I know how easy it would be to misuse the privilege.

The legal and marketing teams that come up with the jargon and slogans about privacy are so far removed from the day to day operations that they have no clue about the reality. I don't they would care even if they did.

Re: Google employees are listening to Google Home conversations

#352

Post by RosanaAnaDana »

nicky0 wrote: post #96
50656E6973 wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>This is only creepy if you don't understand how the software works. No, its only creepy if you're not sure whether or not conversations had in the "privacy" of your own home are being listened to by a faceless person

1) We are not talking about private conversations. We are talking about interactions between the device and its user. 2) Barring some horrible accident or deformity, the person probably has a face.

>2) Barring some horrible accident or deformity, the person probably has a face.

Spoken like a true ML expert.

Re: Google employees are listening to Google Home conversations

#353

Post by asperous »

The current headline seems to imply more than what's actually happening. What's happening is when google hears "ok google" the recording is saved and may be manually reviewed for ML training purposes.

The problem is hearing "ok google" is not reliable and it sometimes captures normal conversations.

I do think it's an ethics issue that people may not be told clearly when buying these products that these recordings may leave their homes and can be heard by people (though only up to a minute and without any clear PII unless someone says something identifiable).

Re: Google employees are listening to Google Home conversations

#354

Post by WalterBright »

cronix wrote: post #307
gringoDan wrote: post #95

I think the responses to this can be broken down into a 2x2 matrix: level of concern vs. understanding of technology. 1) Don't understand ML; not concerned - "I have nothing to hide." 2) Don't understand ML; concerned - "I bought this device and now people are spying on me!" 3) Understand ML; not concerned - "Of course, Google needs to label its training data." 4) Understand ML; concerned - "How can we train models/c…

I'm in the 5th category. 5) Understand ML; concerned - won't allow any of these things in my house period because they will always use them for things behind the scenes that they won't state. I don't care how well trained they are, or "ethical." Ethical... according to who, and at what time period in the future? Ethics change. The data they have on you won't. Look at all of the politicians and other people getting in…

Imagine 20 years from now you decide to run for political office. Do you want someone "ethically" going through all your old recorded conversations looking for statements that will be politically incorrect 20 years from now?

Re: Google employees are listening to Google Home conversations

#355

Post by WalterBright »

blacksmith_tb wrote: post #334
a3n wrote: post #321

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I won't have one either. Well, I have my Android, which I guess is essentially the same. I was visiting my neighbor the other day. We were wondering something about special counsel mueller, and she decided to ask Alexa. This was new, and I was surprised she had this surveillance device, but I didn't say anything. There was some back and forth, then I said to her "I think you're ordering motor oil " "Alexa, stop! Alex…

Do they know it was you, specifically? I would say they know your neighbor was talking with someone else, and possibly that politics were being discussed (not really something they seem to have put a lot of effort into recognizing, since it doesn't lead to shopping...) If you're interacting with an Echo or gHome you can always ask it "who am I?" GOOG is sneaky enough to recognize you on any other device, Alexa, not s…

> Do they know it was you, specifically?

Maybe not with today's technology, but in the future, they will still have the recording and will have the technology.

It's the same thing with encryption. It's safe today, but in the future it'll be decodeable, and they'll still have the encrypted copies to work on.

Re: Google employees are listening to Google Home conversations

#356

Post by basch »

pdonis wrote: post #340
outworlder wrote: post #336

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Before I go further: do you own a smartphone? If not, you can ignore the rest. So, assuming you have a smartphone. That is a device which has: - Permanent network connection. Doesn't matter what you do on your Wifi, it has the cellular data network. Which is controlled by an independent processor with its own firmware - Excellent noise-cancellation microphones. They may not be able to pinpoint the sound source like a…

On my smartphone I can at least turn off the apps that would automatically listen for voice commands; I can use the phone just fine without them. And if I thought there was enough of a threat that Google or someone else was listening in using my phone's microphone without my knowledge, even with the apps turned off, I would switch to a rooted phone that would give me more control. For the Echo/Google Home/etc. device…

Theres a mute button on the echo. You can turn voice off just the same as you can on a phone.

Re: Google employees are listening to Google Home conversations

#357

Post by superkuh »

viklove wrote: post #291
paganel wrote: post #131

I grew up as a kid in a country ruled by Securitate [1], one of the few institutions that rivaled the East-German Stasi when it came to spying on its own citizens, and as such I'm very, very perplexed of why would anyone bring in a listening device in his/her own house out of his/her own volition. And those people even pay for the privilege of having their home-lives actively monitored and listened to almost all the…

Do you have a smartphone? Why would you bring that listening device (the smartphone) into your own house out of your own volition? Please explain, because I am very perplexed.

I don't have a smartphone (never have) and I don't take my dumb nokia with me unless the battery is out.

You're right. But it doesn't mean that these home voice assistants are okay. It just means there's a much, much worse problem with smart phones people aren't willing to acknowledge. And those of us that do and act accordingly are treated as weird paranoids.

Re: Google employees are listening to Google Home conversations

#358

Post by clebio »

outworlder wrote: post #336
cronix wrote: post #307

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm in the 5th category. 5) Understand ML; concerned - won't allow any of these things in my house period because they will always use them for things behind the scenes that they won't state. I don't care how well trained they are, or "ethical." Ethical... according to who, and at what time period in the future? Ethics change. The data they have on you won't. Look at all of the politicians and other people getting in…

Before I go further: do you own a smartphone? If not, you can ignore the rest. So, assuming you have a smartphone. That is a device which has: - Permanent network connection. Doesn't matter what you do on your Wifi, it has the cellular data network. Which is controlled by an independent processor with its own firmware - Excellent noise-cancellation microphones. They may not be able to pinpoint the sound source like a…

None of which invalidates these concerns. You just fall into category 1 or 3.

Re: Google employees are listening to Google Home conversations

#359

Post by duxup »

espeed wrote: post #34
duxup wrote: post #2

This falls into the category of: I bugged my house... NOW MY HOUSE IS BUGGED! Not to dismiss the value of the news here, it is important for folks to know, but the overall situation is both concerning, and amusing.

Your phone has more sensors on it than these devices and most people have their phones on them 24/7. And most phones have the same voice-controlled features too. Why people are concerned about narrow scoped voice-devices more than their phone is a curious thing. Is it because it talks back to you that makes it more apparent?

It is just more recent.

Plenty of articles about phones listening too.

Re: Google employees are listening to Google Home conversations

#360

Post by m3at »

gringoDan wrote: post #95

I think the responses to this can be broken down into a 2x2 matrix: level of concern vs. understanding of technology. 1) Don't understand ML; not concerned - "I have nothing to hide." 2) Don't understand ML; concerned - "I bought this device and now people are spying on me!" 3) Understand ML; not concerned - "Of course, Google needs to label its training data." 4) Understand ML; concerned - "How can we train models/c…

I'm in both 3 and 4.

4 because not being explicit about the practice is misleading at best, outsourcing the difficult task of keeping the analysis private show how unimportant it's considered, and because big techs have a tendency to decrease privacy over time. Using clients who paid for the product as a dataset generator is also wrong.

But 3 at the same time because well, it's important to evaluate the performance of the product in the field not just in the lab. There were so many cases of catastrophic failures for ML models (ex. classifying black people as gorilla) that having a tight feedback loop is important.

It has to be done right, but evaluating a product that was primarily developed for (or at least by) English speakers and transfered to other domains seem like the right thing to do.

All in all, I don't and wouldn't use one of those assistants because 4 outweigh 3, but it's not binary.

Post reply on HN