The Rise of ‘Luxury Surveillance’ • Hacker News Board

Re: The Rise of ‘Luxury Surveillance’

#121

Post by Roark66 » Thu, Oct 20, 2022, 1:57 AM UTC

People can enjoy the benefits of AI assistance without having their privacy violated. Running ML models on edge devices will become the norm whenever possible. Then we will allow such devices like Alexa to talk to web endpoints to get data, but not to submit any info the other way. I definitely can see a whole new niche of software called "privacy protection firewalls" that would sit on the network between "Alexa" and your wifi router (perhaps running on the router) and do smart filtering what "Alexa" and other devices alike are allowed to do.

We're not very far from being able to run pretty powerful AIs on edge devices. For one today's newest android phones all support vulkan and are equipped with GPUs that can run pretty sophisticated models. Also our better understanding of those models will lead to optimisations in their size.

So, let's not throw the baby out with the bath water. Let's not paint AI assistants watching over out sleep as something bad. It is not. It is bad only when we have no control over what it does with the data it collects.

Re: The Rise of ‘Luxury Surveillance’

#122

Post by neogodless » Thu, Oct 20, 2022, 1:57 AM UTC

hedgehog wrote: post #87

cr4nberry wrote: post #80

There's something weird about wearables and also recent advances in home surveillance. I see people posting here that the customers don't want surveillance, they want metrics. But, like... why? What's the appeal? People will spend hundreds of dollars on something like an Apple watch, and all it really does is make texts and calls slightly more convenient (I don't buy it) and give you little metrics to look at. People…

I recently switched from a mechanical watch to Apple Watch. Here's why: First, I wanted metrics on sleep and exercise to manage against (how am I allocating my time) and better understand how to optimize performance (e.g. even one beer has noticeable impact on rest). Second, I want an easier way to get a subset of notifications without picking up my phone. My hands are full with work or family most of the day so this…

Agree with all this except my Garmin Venu only needs charged after 8 days so it's not very annoying!

Re: The Rise of ‘Luxury Surveillance’

#123

Post by hnews_account_1 » Thu, Oct 20, 2022, 1:58 AM UTC

ewzimm wrote: post #5

If there were an Amazon Prison option, I wonder how many people would choose it. Need to serve time? Skip the cell and stay home with a robust suite of real-time behavior analytics to ensure compliance. Conversations are processed locally and scanned for restricted subjects with advanced AI. A special Amazon Prison store offers a full suite of approved products with automatic payments, accessible with Alexa, and cust…

Aside from the dystopian undertone, if I was a betting man, I’d wager they’ll immediately spawn entire industries that disable these surveillance devices for a cost. At the cyberpunk end of dystopian, if I was selling the surveillance tech, I’d also dip into the counter industry and provide some low severity exploits for and play both sides.

I wonder if Neal Stephenson has written something of this sort. In Snow Crash, prisons were a per franchise affair iirc.

Re: The Rise of ‘Luxury Surveillance’

#124

Post by LeonTheremin » Thu, Oct 20, 2022, 1:59 AM UTC

krapp wrote: post #117

1vuio0pswjnm7 wrote: post #32

"What does it mean when one's life becomes completely legible to tech companies?" Does it mean something different than if one's life becomes completely legible to a government. If yes, then why.

Yes, because governments can have you silenced, arrested, tortured or killed, whereas tech companies can at best only ban you from their platforms, or not target ads or content to you.

No post body was provided.

Re: The Rise of ‘Luxury Surveillance’

#125

Post by DennisP » Thu, Oct 20, 2022, 2:07 AM UTC

sneak wrote: post #37

DennisP wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What about my neighbor's Ring doorbell, pointed at my front door from across the street?

I’m torn on this one; as a photographer and videographer I find the right to shoot or film anything I can see from a legal vantage point very near and dear to me. We should always be legally allowed to film public places. Europe’s legislative approach to this is wrong, I think, but I see the problem. Perhaps we need different societal norms.

If you want to walk by on the sidewalk and snap a couple pictures of my house, or even take a little video, I agree that's totally fine. But a surveillance camera that's there 24/7, uploading everything to Amazon's cloud, doesn't seem like the same sort of thing to me. In theory at least that can mean Amazon knows when I arrive and leave, all the time.

Re: The Rise of ‘Luxury Surveillance’

#126

Post by dinvlad » Thu, Oct 20, 2022, 2:10 AM UTC

_jal wrote: post #101

cr4nberry wrote: post #80

There's something weird about wearables and also recent advances in home surveillance. I see people posting here that the customers don't want surveillance, they want metrics. But, like... why? What's the appeal? People will spend hundreds of dollars on something like an Apple watch, and all it really does is make texts and calls slightly more convenient (I don't buy it) and give you little metrics to look at. People…

> Imo the wearables are more of a status thing than anything All jewelry signals status. Wearables just add some functions to the ancillary time telling. One thing I think it interesting about the status marker of wearables is that it is a bit tied to its origin at the moment. Maybe that will wear off in time, but as of now, they have a whiff of "white collar drone" to them. The really wealthy people I know wear (ver…

Interestingly, Apple Watch was initially designed to compete with Rolex, but then Apple found out that folks who can afford Rolex don’t want to change it for anything else. Hence, the mass-market pivoted Watch was born.

Re: The Rise of ‘Luxury Surveillance’

#127

Post by bo1024 » Thu, Oct 20, 2022, 2:14 AM UTC

Roark66 wrote: post #121

People can enjoy the benefits of AI assistance without having their privacy violated. Running ML models on edge devices will become the norm whenever possible. Then we will allow such devices like Alexa to talk to web endpoints to get data, but not to submit any info the other way. I definitely can see a whole new niche of software called "privacy protection firewalls" that would sit on the network between "Alexa" an…

Agree with a lot of this, but what a sad situation if the best we can hope for in "control over what it does" is distrust my own device so much that I install firewalls to keep it in check. A much better version of this vision is FOSS.

Re: The Rise of ‘Luxury Surveillance’

#128

Post by code_duck » Thu, Oct 20, 2022, 2:24 AM UTC

krapp wrote: post #117

1vuio0pswjnm7 wrote: post #32

"What does it mean when one's life becomes completely legible to tech companies?" Does it mean something different than if one's life becomes completely legible to a government. If yes, then why.

Yes, because governments can have you silenced, arrested, tortured or killed, whereas tech companies can at best only ban you from their platforms, or not target ads or content to you.

Governments have many ways to get information about people from tech companies, though. Legal, illegal, quasi-legal, in aggregate or about individuals, direct from the company, or through interception. Sometimes the companies volunteer it, sometimes they are required to share it, sometimes a government just takes it. Not thinking of only the US here. I assume if Meta, for instance, has data about me, the US Government and maybe even local agencies have access to that data somehow.

Re: The Rise of ‘Luxury Surveillance’

#129

Post by ewzimm » Thu, Oct 20, 2022, 2:25 AM UTC

belfalas wrote: post #76

ewzimm wrote: post #5

If there were an Amazon Prison option, I wonder how many people would choose it. Need to serve time? Skip the cell and stay home with a robust suite of real-time behavior analytics to ensure compliance. Conversations are processed locally and scanned for restricted subjects with advanced AI. A special Amazon Prison store offers a full suite of approved products with automatic payments, accessible with Alexa, and cust…

You jest, but most likely someone at Amazon will read this and think to themselves: "you know...the for-profit private prison industry is ripe for disruption. This could be a good lead." Also, what you describe has been done before in history. In the 19th century in the US there were "Pullman Towns" - everything from A to Z owned by the Pullman company. "Get baptized in a Pullman church, go to a Pullman school, work…

I had those “Pullman Towns” in mind. This type of system opens up obvious opportunities for exploitation, but so do our existing prison systems. If we ever did replace prisons, I think it would involve something like this.

Since Amazon Prison is so close to life already, we might all benefit from thinking about how to solve its issues. As the legal system necessitates lawyers, a digital prison might need digital advocates programmed by the prisoner‘s representatives. Could we design a digital jail that could both monitor the prisoner and share privileges?

As software introduces more restrictions on our lives, we could benefit from something like an AI “Freedom Box” that represented us while interfacing with proprietary services. People have already made AI lawyers to suggest options. Maybe these could merge with security software to allow us to navigate whatever future prisons we build.

Re: The Rise of ‘Luxury Surveillance’

#130

Post by notriddle » Thu, Oct 20, 2022, 2:27 AM UTC

bo1024 wrote: post #127

Roark66 wrote: post #121

People can enjoy the benefits of AI assistance without having their privacy violated. Running ML models on edge devices will become the norm whenever possible. Then we will allow such devices like Alexa to talk to web endpoints to get data, but not to submit any info the other way. I definitely can see a whole new niche of software called "privacy protection firewalls" that would sit on the network between "Alexa" an…

Agree with a lot of this, but what a sad situation if the best we can hope for in "control over what it does" is distrust my own device so much that I install firewalls to keep it in check. A much better version of this vision is FOSS.

FOSS is useful, and may be a part of the solution, but it is not the solution in and of itself the way Free Software advocates portray it as.

Most people aren't programmers, people who are programmers don't read the source code of everything they run even if they're allowed to, and even people who try to read the source code for everything they run won't necessarily be able to catch every potential nefarious act. The ingredients list on the back of the box is not the only form of consumer protection in place for food. It shouldn't be the only consumer protection in place for software, either.