Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Thanks to Siri Recaps, your Apple Watch is always listening

techradar.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 128 posts

Re: Thanks to Siri Recaps, your Apple Watch is always listening

#31

Post by bondarchuk »

sillyfluke wrote: post #20
Schiendelman wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's been plenty of evidence that nothing is recorded or sent back, hardly "absence of complete proof". People have identified basically everything coming from the network stack of an iPhone. This is already normalized in most modern office buildings. There are video and audio recording devices in virtually all common areas. This started a bit after private offices were done away with.

>There's been plenty of evidence that nothing is recorded or sent back, hardly "absence of complete proof". You may have a different understanding of the word "complete" than the standard definition. Unless you are claiming the verifiers kept the watches being tested under constant survellance for several years, the proof you are alluding to may only prove that it is not routinely sending or recording data. It does n…

Uh sorry guys I phrased it weird I meant "complete absence of proof" more like.

Re: Thanks to Siri Recaps, your Apple Watch is always listening

#32

Post by 0gs »

napolux wrote: post #7

Never bought a smartwatch, even when I was in love with the Pebble. I hate having to charge it every day. I don't need notifications on my wrist. I have a Casio that has a 10 years battery and dual timezone I need when I travel and a TAG Heuer when I need a "better looking" watch. I don't need to track steps or trainings. Even when I did it was with stupid gadgets like early fitbit bands without displays. When I will…

fwiw, the new pebble lasts a week on a charge and it is great. but agree most of the smart features are still useless.

Re: Thanks to Siri Recaps, your Apple Watch is always listening

#34

Post by skinfaxi »

Krasnol wrote: post #27
gumby wrote: post #12

I like the idea (we’ll see about the execs). It seems to record what I would remember anyway (“yesterday you and Joe and Anupam talked about going fishing a chose a date”) unless I was distracted. It’s like the cameras in the glasses. If all they said is what _I_ know (“That’s Julie who worked in the same group as you at company Z three years ago. You also ran into her at the grocery store shortly after you quit Z an…

Would you ask Joe and Anupam for their consent to be recorded? I doubt it and this is the actual problem here with those glasses and now the watch.

Any friend or acquaintance that recorded without consent would probably not be in the friend group for much longer. If you don't trust your friends in the first place that seems the like problem to tackle.

Re: Thanks to Siri Recaps, your Apple Watch is always listening

#36

Post by bonsai_spool »

jsw97 wrote: post #29
bonsai_spool wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This is, I believe, a felony in Massachusetts. I hear this a lot but such a perspective elides the novelty (and the actual question): If I devise a mechanical device that semi-faithfully creates marks that convey information about a conversation - but which does not offer a way to replay the conversation whatsoever - does that constitute a recording subject to two-party consent? If so, how does this relate to a pot…

Not sure why my comment merited a downvote. In any case, quoting from Mass law: https://malegislature.gov/Laws/GeneralLaws/PartIV/TitleI/Cha... The term ''interception'' means to secretly hear, secretly record, or aid another to secretly hear or secretly record the contents of any wire or oral communication through the use of any intercepting device by any person other than a person given prior authority by all parti…

Fair enough, it seems the watch would be an 'intercepting device' and thus all parties would need to agree for any party to use the device for the summary function.

Re: Thanks to Siri Recaps, your Apple Watch is always listening

#37

Post by PyWoody »

jsw97 wrote: post #29
bonsai_spool wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This is, I believe, a felony in Massachusetts. I hear this a lot but such a perspective elides the novelty (and the actual question): If I devise a mechanical device that semi-faithfully creates marks that convey information about a conversation - but which does not offer a way to replay the conversation whatsoever - does that constitute a recording subject to two-party consent? If so, how does this relate to a pot…

Not sure why my comment merited a downvote. In any case, quoting from Mass law: https://malegislature.gov/Laws/GeneralLaws/PartIV/TitleI/Cha... The term ''interception'' means to secretly hear, secretly record, or aid another to secretly hear or secretly record the contents of any wire or oral communication through the use of any intercepting device by any person other than a person given prior authority by all parti…

  Not sure why my comment merited a downvote.
There seems to be a mass downvoting scheme on HN lately. I don't know who's behind it and what their motives are but I constantly see valid comments made within the last five minutes greyed out.

Re: Thanks to Siri Recaps, your Apple Watch is always listening

#39

Post by skinfaxi »

jsw97 wrote: post #26
bryanrasmussen wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

it works, in an American context, because the states would have to take it to court and determine if this actually fell under the rules of making a recording. Argument for, there is no recording stored anywhere thus it does not need consent. Argument against, there is obviously a recording made. A recording is made and transmitted between devices and Apple and afterwards deleted, that this happens almost real time as…

Argument for only wins because of the weight of the lawyers they can bring to bear. Clearly ephemeral recording for the purposes of processing violates the spirit of the statute at least. And there is this, from the MGL: The term ''interception'' means to secretly hear, secretly record, or aid another to secretly hear or secretly record the contents of any wire or oral communication through the use of any interceptin…

> This may become a case of we don't enforce the laws against large companies.

Why would Apple be a party here at all? Would Sony be a party if someone records another with a walkman?

Re: Thanks to Siri Recaps, your Apple Watch is always listening

#40

Post by napolux »

basch wrote: post #30
napolux wrote: post #7

Never bought a smartwatch, even when I was in love with the Pebble. I hate having to charge it every day. I don't need notifications on my wrist. I have a Casio that has a 10 years battery and dual timezone I need when I travel and a TAG Heuer when I need a "better looking" watch. I don't need to track steps or trainings. Even when I did it was with stupid gadgets like early fitbit bands without displays. When I will…

tap to pay is handy, i would wear something just for that if it lasted all week on a charge. having a fitness / sleep tracker that i cant wear while i sleep cuz it needs to charge defeats the purpose. doesnt quite fill during a shower. apple also made it prohibitively cumbersome / confusing to own two devices that boot up to identical instances. why cant i have two pieces of hardware, and whichever one i pick up resu…

> tap to pay is handy, i would wear something just for that if it lasted all week on a charge.

https://www.swatch.com/en-us/swatch-pay/how-it-works.html

(just the first that comes to my mind, no battery usage)

Post reply on HN