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

71–80 of 573 posts

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

#71

Post by Terretta »

XJ6 wrote: post #12
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"?

All "big tech" are at it, I tried to go to "My Pictures" the other day and microsoft asked me to run my pictures through facial recognition. They said that by consenting I was asserting I had the consent of anyone who appeared in any of my photos or might appear in future which is insane to ask of anyone, no-one can really give that third party consent. Then when I refused they showed me a nag screen which didn't hav…

Not all big tech are at it.

The reason you hear a global sigh that “my battery life is terrible!” at every major iOS release, is the photo face to people clustering is done entirely on-device, and which photos are in the cluster is not shared across devices through iCloud.

There are several such features where Apple has made life difficult for themselves and the UX a little less seamless for users, in service of not giving themselves all the data.

Depending how the politics of privacy go, we could find an aggregation of personal data is not an asset, but a liability.

In such an environment, avoiding “hoovering up all data” is both a marketing point, and a reduction of risk exposure.

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

#72

Post by hn_throwaway_99 »

IshKebab wrote: post #37
afpx wrote: post #33

How is this even legal if wiretapping is illegal in many places?

I don't think there's anywhere where it's illegal to record conversations of both parties know about it.

That's the point though, if your Nest device starts automatically recording your guests and you don't warn them, could you be liable in a 2-party consent state?

But on the flip side, Google Assistant devices don't start recording unless it gets the "OK Google" keyword, so it's not like it's randomly recording everything. You specifically have to turn it on (albeit it can be turned on accidentally if it misdetects an OK Google). Is this somehow different from Nest devices?

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

#73

Post by prepend »

XJ6 wrote: post #12
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"?

All "big tech" are at it, I tried to go to "My Pictures" the other day and microsoft asked me to run my pictures through facial recognition. They said that by consenting I was asserting I had the consent of anyone who appeared in any of my photos or might appear in future which is insane to ask of anyone, no-one can really give that third party consent. Then when I refused they showed me a nag screen which didn't hav…

Google has implemented this asshole design/nagware in many products to push unnecessary to me and invasive data collection or functionality I want won’t be available.

For example, their maps app on iOS won’t save locations for me unless I sign in an enable web history tracking. I get prompted every time I try to save a pin as well as every once in a while I’m case I change my mind.

It’s a free app and it’s Google’s prerogative to try to get value out of it. But it’s annoying to me that they purposely don’t implement client tech (eg, save to app cache, device cookie not tied to individual) that would make their app better for me. And that they nag with no way to turn off forever. Their app already shows ads and makes money for them, they just want more money from the data stream.

I also worry about less savvy customers who don’t understand the prompt and unwittingly opt in to data collection that exists forever. The Facebook privacy explosion of last year is an example of users who accepted terms, but didn’t understand them, and got upset when data was used in ways that upset them.

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

#74

Post by prepend »

Terretta wrote: post #71
XJ6 wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All "big tech" are at it, I tried to go to "My Pictures" the other day and microsoft asked me to run my pictures through facial recognition. They said that by consenting I was asserting I had the consent of anyone who appeared in any of my photos or might appear in future which is insane to ask of anyone, no-one can really give that third party consent. Then when I refused they showed me a nag screen which didn't hav…

Not all big tech are at it. The reason you hear a global sigh that “my battery life is terrible!” at every major iOS release, is the photo face to people clustering is done entirely on-device, and which photos are in the cluster is not shared across devices through iCloud. There are several such features where Apple has made life difficult for themselves and the UX a little less seamless for users, in service of not…

Is Apple the only big tech that’s using AI on device in a privacy protecting way?

I appreciate their approach to user functionality that doesn’t dump all my data into a near infinite number of collectors.

I also think it’s a neat way of distributed computing to use the cpus of all these phones sleeping at night to crunch stuff is actually cheaper than cloud. I think because the phones are sunk cost that is idle a few hours a day.

I miss the BOINC/Folding/SETI at Home clients that used to run as my screensaver and try to do good.

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

#75

Post by SifJar »

wowamit wrote: post #67
tagawa wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think this is the part hidden from view when companies claim they let users opt out of data collection. Yes you can opt out, but some (possibly unrelated) features won’t be available to you.

Yes, but I think when they disable that feature, they must provide some justification that is believable right? I can't think of any for this.

"if we can't profit from you, you can't use our services" seems like a fairly reasonable justification from a business' perspective

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

#76

Post by jwalton »

XJ6 wrote: post #12
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"?

All "big tech" are at it, I tried to go to "My Pictures" the other day and microsoft asked me to run my pictures through facial recognition. They said that by consenting I was asserting I had the consent of anyone who appeared in any of my photos or might appear in future which is insane to ask of anyone, no-one can really give that third party consent. Then when I refused they showed me a nag screen which didn't hav…

> I wanted to try the google podcasts but it was a brick because I had disabled "youtube & web activity"

This is the worst. I have all the privacy settings turned up. In Google Maps on my phone, when I try to set my "Home" location, it tells me I need to turn on "Web and App Activity". What? Why? How are these two things related? Why do you have to track what apps I use and upload this info to Google in order to remember where my house is?

It's a bit like a psycho ex; "You want to have my phone number in your phone even though we broke up? Ok, but that means I get to install this camera in your bedroom."

The worst part is, it's all lies. If I open up Android Auto it says "12 mins to Home", so maps in Android Auto still knows where "Home" is, even though the Google Maps app claims it can't set home anymore.

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

#77

Post by nebulous1 »

jstanley wrote: post #31
nebulous1 wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 anythin…

Hopefully somebody else will reply to you because it's been a while for me and I forget the details. There are settings in the Google App itself, settings in your Google Account in general and also I denied the relevant recording permissions for various google apps.

I'm using Lineage at the moment. I'd like to ditch Android entirely but I'm not sure ubports is where it needs to be yet. Unfortunately the open non-Android mobile OS's seem to die before they reach maturity. Obviously it's tough on them if they're competing with an existing app ecosystem, as they are.

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

#78

Post by throwaheyy »

prepend wrote: post #73
XJ6 wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All "big tech" are at it, I tried to go to "My Pictures" the other day and microsoft asked me to run my pictures through facial recognition. They said that by consenting I was asserting I had the consent of anyone who appeared in any of my photos or might appear in future which is insane to ask of anyone, no-one can really give that third party consent. Then when I refused they showed me a nag screen which didn't hav…

Google has implemented this asshole design/nagware in many products to push unnecessary to me and invasive data collection or functionality I want won’t be available. For example, their maps app on iOS won’t save locations for me unless I sign in an enable web history tracking. I get prompted every time I try to save a pin as well as every once in a while I’m case I change my mind. It’s a free app and it’s Google’s p…

That kind of user-hostile bullshit is why I avoid anything and everything associated with Google. Still use search, but trying to break that habit.

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

#79

Post by vonmoltke »

tobylane wrote: post #57
soulofmischief wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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 .

Public interest is a defence for not having obtained permission.

I'm not sure that's universally true. Even where it is, that doesn't mean the recording will be admissable as evidence in a legal proceeding.

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

#80

Post by a3n »

Why would anyone come back to a home after such a warning?

Think back 20 years. Would you come back to a home after the resident switched on audio and video recorders and said "you're being recorded."

Now come back to the present, and add the word "thermostat." Does it make any difference?

Post reply on HN