171–180 of 336 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It’s similar with the TSA facial recognition photos. “We delete your photo immediately” but what they don’t say is that they don’t delete the biometrics from that photo.
It's a crime that were compelled to concede our 4th Amendment rights in order to travel.
People seem to ignore the cost and accuracy aspects of a phone listening to you 24/7. At least with today’s constraints, it is highly unlikely to be happening. First, the cost to transcribe audio is not free. It is computationally expensive. Any ad network or at scale service would not be able to afford it, especially in orgs where they are concerned about unit economics. Secondly, the accuracy would be horrible. Mos…
For all of these reasons, audio snooping is much more likely to be something done by wired, stationary devices that maybe have a decent amount of RAM + a fair bit of usually-idle processing capacity (to run the transcription model locally and just push the resulting text), and which are expected to draw a decent amount of power and use the Internet at vaguely-arbitrary times. Like a smart TV, for example.
Second thing I do is block the TV access to internet after I do one firmware update.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> It's impossible to use this covertly. *Unless there's a zero-day that allows it.
If you're going to exploit a privilege escalation vulnerability from your app, why not just grab the most interesting parts of the /data partition while you're at it?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's a crime that were compelled to concede our 4th Amendment rights in order to travel.
Amtrak and Greyhound do not require those biometrics, nor does renting a car and driving (or driving your own).
People seem to ignore the cost and accuracy aspects of a phone listening to you 24/7. At least with today’s constraints, it is highly unlikely to be happening. First, the cost to transcribe audio is not free. It is computationally expensive. Any ad network or at scale service would not be able to afford it, especially in orgs where they are concerned about unit economics. Secondly, the accuracy would be horrible. Mos…
What if only the audio of "high value" targets is recorded. Meaning people who buy a lot of stuff. So it might be worthwhile to only record their sounds. Which will explain why random testing (usually with new/clean phones) is never successful in detecting a recording event.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Amtrak and Greyhound do not require those biometrics, nor does renting a car and driving (or driving your own).
Some of us want to be able to cross the country in an afternoon, and not have to spend days on a slow, uncomfortable train to make the same trip. I don't think that's unreasonable.
This article reminds me of this excellent tongue-in-cheek piece of writing by Jonathan Zeller in McSweeney's: Calm Down—Your Phone Isn’t Listening to Your Conversations. It’s Just Tracking Everything You Type, Every App You Use, Every Website You Visit, and Everywhere You Go in the Physical World https://www.mcsweeneys.net/articles/calm-down-your-phone-isn...
And of course it is also doing screen recognition (the kind of stuff OP article mentions), but that is not what I’m talking about. I’m talking about microphone data picking up live conversation from people in the room.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's a crime that were compelled to concede our 4th Amendment rights in order to travel.
Same with drivers licenses and passports having a photo requirement too
You can opt out, just say you do (and preferably cover the camera with your hat or bag)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Same with drivers licenses and passports having a photo requirement too
>drivers licenses and passports having a photo requirement too You're free to take the bus, or hire a chauffeur. A private pilots license doesn't have any pictures either.
People seem to ignore the cost and accuracy aspects of a phone listening to you 24/7. At least with today’s constraints, it is highly unlikely to be happening. First, the cost to transcribe audio is not free. It is computationally expensive. Any ad network or at scale service would not be able to afford it, especially in orgs where they are concerned about unit economics. Secondly, the accuracy would be horrible. Mos…
For all of these reasons, audio snooping is much more likely to be something done by wired, stationary devices that maybe have a decent amount of RAM + a fair bit of usually-idle processing capacity (to run the transcription model locally and just push the resulting text), and which are expected to draw a decent amount of power and use the Internet at vaguely-arbitrary times. Like a smart TV, for example.