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

>> "The reason is "people" lack education in technology"

> This is a dumb statement.

How about doing a bit of research before saying stuff like that?

For example:

https://lifehacker.com/this-chart-shows-how-computer-literat...

From the article:

"The results aren’t terribly surprising if you’ve ever worked a help desk. Around 5% of the U.S. population ranks at level 3, the strongest level of computer literacy. Another 26% ranks at level 2, where users can do things like “find a sustainability-related document that was sent to you by John Smith in October last year.” Those who ranked in level 2 likely aren’t developers or engineers, but they get by.

However, for the 69% of the population below level 2, complex skills are still hard to come by. 26% of people weren’t even able to use computers. The full report at the source link below shows how these numbers break down over age ranges. Regardless, the numbers give some perspective on how skilled the overall population is."

And this is about using a computer. Understanding technology in general is a very different matter. The data on this isn't difficult to discover. There have been a number of studies, for example:

https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/12/04/half-of-ame...

The vast majority of the population is utterly ignorant when it comes to technology. Start adding areas like machine learning and AI and the chasm is massive, deep and wide.

Using tech people to claim this problem does not exists and, therefore, calling the statement "stupid", betrays a failure to understand the topic at hand.

The same is true about medical knowledge. The vast majority of the population is utterly ignorant about medical science, pharmacology, etc. Claiming this statement is "stupid" because doctors, nurses and medical practitioners do, in fact, understand the domain, is, again, missing the point. And missing reality.

The example is useful because, unlike in the general case of technology, the medical sector has a range of safeguards, rules and laws in place in order to protect consumers. Very little, if any, of that exists in technology.

You can manufacture and sell a 3D printer that can fail and burn down someone's house. There is not FDA equivalent in order to ensure some level of safety exists as a minimum. If you think FCC, UL, CE and TUV provide those safeguards, well, you are obviously not in the hardware business. This is particularly true for the utter junk that comes from China, where these certifications are given away like candy and ar sometimes falsified.

And so, you can insert a microphone and a camera into a consumer device and there really isn't anything preventing anyone from using those sensors nefariously. This is particularly true if the device's firmware and software can be updated over the 'net. Which means you can ship a device that can test out to be completely benign. Later on the same device is updated over the net to include obtrusive capabilities that compromise privacy, and nobody is there to prevent that.

And then, of course, there's this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0vL4HLTZQ_Q

and this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t-lMIGV-dUI

...and who can forget this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aHGd6LqAVzw

> It sounds like you have short-term rental properties, aka unregulated hotels, or more accurately regulation-skirting residential businesses.

This is not correct. I pay transient occupancy tax just like the hotels (11% at one, 7% for another) and also have local authorities come out periodically for certifications to make sure everything is up to their standards (fire alarms, extinguishers, lighting, safety rails, notices posted outside, etc).

If I was in a city that didn't have regulations for short term rentals, then it wouldn't be a regulation-skirting business anyway. It's only skirting if the area has TOT and regulations in place and you don't abide. How did you get to this conclusion based on my post?

> I mean you've basically admitted... that you record your guests in outside areas where they can expect privacy

No I didn't. And my listings clearly state that I have cameras outside.

> That people make movies in places they expect privacy (shocking)

Why is this shocking? They were making a low budget horror film. You need a license to film a movie on someone else's property and the city has regulations and procedures for filming. Not to mention they started a large fire in the desert and I could see the fire department come out and have a conversation with them. The guest also lied to me saying they were having a little couples getaway and we even gave them a discount because we were told it would just be 2 of them.

> and of course you don't look at any of those skinny-dipping videos wink wink. Funny how unregulated businesses attracting unregulated activities still like to have some way to regulate their guests--and do so likely illegally.

I have a pool at one property but there are no video cameras overlooking the pool. Or even the back yard for that matter.

You've made a lot of assumptions.

If you don't like short term rentals because some people don't comply then that's fine but hotels have bad actors too. Plenty of hotel owners not paying their share of TOT taxes, peep holes in bathrooms, stealing property when cleaning. Ever see those service spaces between 2 rooms? Bad actors would use those for peep holes and watch guests in person.

> I mean second-home you couldn't afford without hotel-income

Actually I can afford both without hotel-income. Even if I couldn't - the cities approve of it and get income and jobs.

> But you don't deal with the bad apples by violating the rights of everyone else, at least unless you want to invite scrutiny and regulation into your activities.

I comply with regulations and also create a lot of income for people in cleaning, maintenance, upgrades. We pay a living wage to all service providers.

Nor do I violate the rights of anyone.

Have you ever seen a verified case of a smartphone operating while off? I have only seen rumors. If you are going to be that paranoid then how do you know removing batteries turns it off? Maybe there is a Secret battery for spying on people.

The homes serve a lot of guests and 95% of them are respectful. How does reviewing footage when they make false claims or I get a report from a neighbor make me a voyeur?

Is there any advantage in involving you in the loop, though? Couldn't it just shutdown upon detecting the problem and turn on a warning light for you to see when you got home?