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

481–490 of 573 posts

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

#481

Post by cvhashim »

notJim wrote: post #402
exclusiv wrote: post #344

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A programmable keypad is nice. I have a Z-wave one which can notify my Smarthings hub which notifies me when it's locked or unlocked. The Nest thermostat allows me to control the heat remotely. These two things are great for rental properties. Guests often forget to lock the door, I have records of when guests or maintenance people are coming or going, I can adjust the heat to 55 when nobody is there which saves a lo…

Honestly all this monitoring and "busting" and "exposing" people for minor infractions sounds exhausting. Personally I have other things to spend my time on than surveilling people. Frankly it's kind of bleak to imagine you sitting around keeping an eye on your surveillance cameras and graphs to make sure no one is stepping out of line.

OP sounds like a voyeur

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

#482

Post by authoritarian »

mey wrote: post #322
oppositelock wrote: post #304

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What does having a Nest thermostat get you? I'm a tech dude, I build modern software, but I live in a dumb, old fashioned house. My programmable Honeywell thermostat, which has no internet connection, does a perfectly fine job of keeping my home the right temperature. My door locks use a key, and keys have great battery life, and my smoke detectors beep instead of speaking to me. What am I missing by not having inter…

I value privacy, my nest thermostat is the only IoT device in my house that talks to the internet or can be accessed remotely without a VPN. What I find most valuable is it programs itself. Am I cold? Turn it up a bit, hot? Turn it down a bit. Suddenly I have stopped having to adjust it at all. Even as life has changed. It has some nice other features, such as preheating/cooling, telling me how long it will take to g…

>What I find most valuable is it programs itself. Am I cold? Turn it up a bit, hot? Turn it down a bit. Suddenly I have stopped having to adjust it at all.

Is that a problem most people have? I bought my house a few years ago and haven't touched my thermostat since I originally set it up years ago

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

#483

Post by authoritarian »

dna_polymerase wrote: post #130
tantalor wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you own a cell phone?

Having a cell phone does not invalidate their legitimate critique.

Apparently on this site it does. I had a conversation where I made a joke about Alexa glasses spying on us all in public instead of just in the privacy of people's homes now and got downvoted to oblivion because apparently you aren't allowed to care about privacy if you own a phone. The amount of whataboutisms on this site where people try to invalidate others opinions or critiques is incredible and makes it very difficult to have any kind of genuine discussion. I imagine it's partially because there are plenty of Google/Facebook/Amazon employees on this site so it's in their best interest to shut down any pro-privacy discussion

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

#484

Post by urda »

saluki wrote: post #115

I was a huge Google Fan but this is becoming lunacy. I understood trading some data and privacy for great search results, maps and free quality email. But people willingly bringing always on listening devices in to their homes (beyond what smartphones are already capable of) I just can't comprehend it. Why would people voluntarily do this in exchange for being able to ask for weather, play a playlist, add a todo and…

If you've carried an Android at all, you've already had a listening device in your home for years. This device also has a ton more sensors and data it collects off you than a smart speaker could.

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

#485

Post by astral303 »

zenography wrote: post #230
wlesieutre wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Normally I'd say "never attribute to malice that which can be explained by incompetence," but I really do think Google could fix this if they wanted to. It still sucks because they don't want to fix it. Google makes their money off of people giving up info for ad targeting, and a user who only contributes one or two manually saved locations probably costs them more than they stand to gain.

Occam's razor also needs to be applied. If the explanation involving malice is the simpler option that makes fewer assumptions, then it is more likely.

I bet this has been discussed internally, but nobody cares because they don’t care about UX enough. They don’t understand the impact. The internal organization is fractured into fiefdoms defending internal services (e.g. deployment, AMP) and defending layers (e.g. SRE department), with nobody left responsible for the complete, vertically integrated user experience.

To me, this is a simpler explanation than malice.

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

#486

Post by urda »

jachee wrote: post #177
SamBam wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't see anything in the parent comment that says this is a Google-only issue. Also, the Netflix and Amazon examples don't seem to be in the same category, to me. Every time you interact with Netflix and Amazon, you are doing so deliberately. You are choosing exactly what to give them. You can easily pick another service. Always-on listening devices, on the other hand, are taking data that you did not choose to gi…

> Every time you interact with ... Amazon, you are doing so deliberately. Don't forget that Echo devices are Amazon's always-on listening devices.

Echo's listen for their wake word, which is done on device and offline. It detects the wake word, and then connects to the internet. It is not actively transmitting in the background.

If you have proof of echo devices not doing this, you need to yield a source. Wireshark logs, anything.

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

#487

Post by bdcravens »

oppositelock wrote: post #304
saluki wrote: post #115

I was a huge Google Fan but this is becoming lunacy. I understood trading some data and privacy for great search results, maps and free quality email. But people willingly bringing always on listening devices in to their homes (beyond what smartphones are already capable of) I just can't comprehend it. Why would people voluntarily do this in exchange for being able to ask for weather, play a playlist, add a todo and…

What does having a Nest thermostat get you? I'm a tech dude, I build modern software, but I live in a dumb, old fashioned house. My programmable Honeywell thermostat, which has no internet connection, does a perfectly fine job of keeping my home the right temperature. My door locks use a key, and keys have great battery life, and my smoke detectors beep instead of speaking to me. What am I missing by not having inter…

> What am I missing by not having internet connected stuff?

I'd say that's a question that can be asked of anything that's Internet-connected. Phones, watches, TVs, cars, etc. They probably all create a level of convenience, typically at some cost Like all costs it's up to each person to make a decision whether that cost is too great - usually these questions are really veiled value judgments on others' cost/benefit analyses.

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

#488

Post by mrb »

kelnos wrote: post #459
saluki wrote: post #115

I was a huge Google Fan but this is becoming lunacy. I understood trading some data and privacy for great search results, maps and free quality email. But people willingly bringing always on listening devices in to their homes (beyond what smartphones are already capable of) I just can't comprehend it. Why would people voluntarily do this in exchange for being able to ask for weather, play a playlist, add a todo and…

> But people willingly bringing always on listening devices in to their homes (beyond what smartphones are already capable of) I just can't comprehend it. I don't get this position: my (Android) phone can already record my voice, so how does having a Google Home materially increase the privacy risk? The GH does have access to mains power and a wifi connection, so that makes it easier to record all the time and upload…

«I don't get this position: my (Android) phone can already record my voice, so how does having a Google Home materially increase the privacy risk?»

Indeed. Maybe people don't realize that a smartphone is a much bigger privacy risk. A phone can literally record audio and video, track your position, monitor all your online activity, and upload all that without you even noticing it, even when the screen is off and locked. (This can happen when the phone is hacked or if the OS or device vendors are evil.)

I think people perceive devices like the Echo Dot or Nest Mini as more dangerouse simply because they aren't used to them. But smartphones have existed for more than a decade, so people have long accepted these.

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

#489

Post by agoodpr838 »

mrb wrote: post #488
kelnos wrote: post #459

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But people willingly bringing always on listening devices in to their homes (beyond what smartphones are already capable of) I just can't comprehend it. I don't get this position: my (Android) phone can already record my voice, so how does having a Google Home materially increase the privacy risk? The GH does have access to mains power and a wifi connection, so that makes it easier to record all the time and upload…

« I don't get this position: my (Android) phone can already record my voice, so how does having a Google Home materially increase the privacy risk? » Indeed. Maybe people don't realize that a smartphone is a much bigger privacy risk. A phone can literally record audio and video, track your position, monitor all your online activity, and upload all that without you even noticing it, even when the screen is off and loc…

The privacy risk is not the same and the convenience to mitigate is not there

I can leave my phone at home when I go out. In another room. Shut it off. I do all of these things quite regularly.

Do I go around and disable numerous smarthome gadgets for privacy or stick with my oh so terrible life without them? Bonus! I can avoid awkward conversations with my guests.

People buy products because we feel they help us be better. There’s little real utility towards bettering myself with a colorful, and extra power sucking, thermostat at home all the time.

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

#490

Post by machello13 »

mindcrime wrote: post #343
naasking wrote: post #220

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But people willingly bringing always on listening devices in to their homes (beyond what smartphones are already capable of) I just can't comprehend it. Always-on listening doesn't seem like a huge deal. What matters is the policy of allowing Google people to listen to captured audio, even if it's for training purposes. This is skirting uncomfortably close to a dystopian surveillance society. If you want to gather…

Always-on audio capture is a HORRIBLE idea in general. First, if it's stored - at all - then you have to ask "who else could get access to the recording besides (Google|Apple|whoever)?" Whether it's a nation-state via a search warrant, or some random script kiddie who hax0red the storage mechanism, once it's recorded you don't know WHO is going to get access, or what their intentions will be. Secondly, even if it's n…

Isn't this true with any device that has an embedded microphone? Laptops and pre-smart cell phones have had the same vulnerabilities for a very long time, no?
Post reply on HN