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

Google chief: I'd disclose smart speakers before guests enter my home

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 573 posts

Re: Google chief: I'd disclose smart speakers before guests enter my home

#31

Post by jstanley »

nebulous1 wrote: post #25
madez wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wish it were socially accepted to tell people to turn their Android device off while they are in company. I wish I could tell people that visit me to turn their device off or put it into rf and sound shielded containers. I don't mind people using computers and their powers to ease their lives. I don't want to deny them that just because they are next to me or in my home. I just don't want them to use that power to…

Why are you carving out Android instead of all smartphones? Also, you can turn off OK google in Android, although they don't make it as easy as they should.

What is actually the correct way to do this?

I don't use Android myself (I use https://ubports.com/ - it's great and you should try it), but several times I've had other people ask me to turn it off, and the best I can come up with is just dragging the Google search box off the home screen. But there's no feedback to suggest it's not still listening, only that shouting "OK GOOGLE" at the phone no longer does anything.

Re: Google chief: I'd disclose smart speakers before guests enter my home

#34

Post by have_faith »

LudwigNagasena wrote: post #2

>"Gosh, I haven't thought about this before in quite this way," Osterloh said. "It's quite important for all these technologies to think about all users... we have to consider all stakeholders that might be in proximity." How much do they not care about privacy that a chief exec with an army of lawyers and advisors "haven't thought about this before"?

> stakeholders that might be in proximity

I didn't realise visiting a friends house made me a stakeholder in all of their technology choices.

Re: Google chief: I'd disclose smart speakers before guests enter my home

#35

Post by soulofmischief »

madez wrote: post #14
pmlnr wrote: post #8

I'm genuinely curious why only nest, alexa, google home[^1] devices get highlighted - aren't they all use the same tech as the Google App on android? Why are android phones not flagged as well? [^1]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21262521

I wish it were socially accepted to tell people to turn their Android device off while they are in company. I wish I could tell people that visit me to turn their device off or put it into rf and sound shielded containers. I don't mind people using computers and their powers to ease their lives. I don't want to deny them that just because they are next to me or in my home. I just don't want them to use that power to…

I have voice-activated assistant on my droid turned off, meanwhile Siri is active on all iDevices, and everyone with a laptop at your place is a mole.

Do you expect to altogether prevent people from bringing computing devices into your home? If you are not a state target, then that is just silly. Focus your malcontent on the real bad actors, not their victims.

Re: Google chief: I'd disclose smart speakers before guests enter my home

#38

Post by pwagland »

edoo wrote: post #21
DJHenk wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In this case it's not the fault of the law though. Everyone with a basic level of intelligence and awareness of cultural norms, i.e. everyone working at Google developing and marketing these kind of products, is aware that this might cause an issue. But blinded by money and optimistic technobabble they do it anyway and make it near impossible or very unpractical for the user to turn it off. I would have no problem wi…

I'm pretty sure the burden would fall on the end user. They don't have to activate those features in an environment where using them would be against the law. Having them activated at your home and failing to inform visitors would be on the user.

Although legally you might be right, and I'm _sure_ that this is written somewhere in that 4 pages of small print that you didn't read. In practice, no-one is going to be aware of this, and because the "big tech" company isn't ensuring that all users are aware of the contract that they have entered has been adequately explained to them, they are arguably at fault for not ensuring that proper authorisations have been obtained.

Re: Google chief: I'd disclose smart speakers before guests enter my home

#39

Post by turk73 »

madez wrote: post #14
pmlnr wrote: post #8

I'm genuinely curious why only nest, alexa, google home[^1] devices get highlighted - aren't they all use the same tech as the Google App on android? Why are android phones not flagged as well? [^1]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21262521

I wish it were socially accepted to tell people to turn their Android device off while they are in company. I wish I could tell people that visit me to turn their device off or put it into rf and sound shielded containers. I don't mind people using computers and their powers to ease their lives. I don't want to deny them that just because they are next to me or in my home. I just don't want them to use that power to…

I think the "unwitting" part is what is the bigger issue here. I know it is conspiracist, but some think Google was founded with the backing of the CIA. Given that these spy orgs wish to spy on literally every single person and apparently have the technology to do it (we paid for all of it) we are essentially funding our own slavery. A jail with no walls, just like China's.

Re: Google chief: I'd disclose smart speakers before guests enter my home

#40

Post by soulofmischief »

edoo wrote: post #13

This happens to be a good example of how there are so many laws you likely break some all the time. California requires consent from all present who have vibrated the air while you record the air vibrations (but not with your ears and brain storage!). That means if the google phone in your pocket listens to people at a restaurant or your alexa listens to your delivery man for a second you are a criminal under Califor…

> California requires consent from all present who have vibrated the air while you record the air vibrations

One-party recording laws enable us to catch bad actors. Otherwise, you can't do things like record Rob Ford smoking crack and being a racist piece of shit while the incumbent mayor. The fact that you don't have the right to record a conversation you are participating in is not a good thing.

Post reply on HN