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

111–120 of 135 posts

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

#111

Post by jsw97 »

bryanrasmussen wrote: post #81
skinfaxi wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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?

Apple is potentially a party because Apple processes and provides a recap of what was processed.

Even beyond this, if you create circumstances where mass commission of consequential felonies is an inevitable result, I suspect that is also illegal. 100% this just gets ignored by the Mass attorney general though.

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

#112

Post by voakbasda »

abirch wrote: post #14
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…

I would love to have AI that can help support my fragmented memory. As my mom said, I'd forget my head if it wasn't attached. However, this requires a lot of TRUST with the company this access. Apple is the only big tech I could trust but I'm still unsure.

Even if you can trust them don’t, you cannot be sure you will trust them tomorrow.

And even if you trust Apple, do you trust the government will not abuse this access? Forever into the future?

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

#113

Post by gumby »

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.

Good question (I thought I implicitly mentioned it but I guess I didn’t).

Does it matter that we’re talking about “recording” within the envelope of typical human capability? I think that distinction does matter and the summary as described is within that region (note: we haven’t seen Apple’s product in the real world, and we know Meta’s is well outside human capability.

Remembering that you talked with Anupam and Joe about fishing is something people do.

Remembering most of the words uttered, specific phrases, etc (the hoary “on your permanent record” joke from RaRHS) is far outside human capability, which is why we have rules about actual recordings.

I consider this kind of capability a kind of prosthetic, like a hearing aid.

By the way I could have scribbled a little note after the conversation (I do this, though these days in my phone): “Joe, Anupam: fishing”. That’s a straight up (if extremely compressed) recording, but no, I would not ask permission for that either.

Not trying to persuade you BTW, just clarifying how I think about the solution space. But don’t forget that the camera case IS handled by human assistants today.

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

#116

Post by gumby »

voakbasda wrote: post #112
abirch wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would love to have AI that can help support my fragmented memory. As my mom said, I'd forget my head if it wasn't attached. However, this requires a lot of TRUST with the company this access. Apple is the only big tech I could trust but I'm still unsure.

Even if you can trust them don’t, you cannot be sure you will trust them tomorrow. And even if you trust Apple, do you trust the government will not abuse this access? Forever into the future?

Apple has clearly done things that make it impossible for them to comply with such requests by not keeping certain data in the first place and/or doing work locally (in the customer’s device) to which it doesn’t have access. This is even in a couple of cases when the result can be inconvenient for the end user (e.g. they can’t restore lost data).

But you’re right to ask about the future. The new CEO doesn’t appear to have the same attitude towards the customer, but rather considers them to be a revenue source to be mined.

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

#117

Post by micromacrofoot »

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…

Right it does secretly record, because of the 15s buffer. "Record then delete" or "Record but can't access" is not acceptable, the law covers intercepting entirely.

Apple is banking on the transcripts-not-recordings and notification sounds (can't be disabled) to avoid it, but MA law is more strict.

I doubt "15s buffer" will hold up as "not a recording" and a notification that the recording is used 15 seconds later (during which a person could have walked away) won't be good enough.

AFAIK one problem is that the law is written to punish the recorder, not the provider of the technology. So it will likely slip by until someone makes a claim against an individual using it, and Apple will end up geofencing it.

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

#118

Post by joshstrange »

This feels like a massive misstep for Apple. It's as if they looked at the Meta Ray Ban controversy and said "I'd like a piece of that!".

I'm pretty sure this is meant as a swipe at OpenAI's upcoming hardware as well as the various (failed) AI Pendant devices, trying to make those products just a feature on Apple's hardware but this seems incredibly risky.

Based on the number of people who have mentioned this "feature" specifically to me today "can you believe..." I have to assume Apple completely misjudged the response to this but only time will tell.

Are we going to have "No Apple Watch allowed past this point"-type signs?

Don't get me wrong, I can see the value in this feature for people in all walks of life but the abuse angle worries me quite a bit. Abusive partners, abusive governments, abusive parents, the list goes on...

Considering leaving you abusive spouse? Better turn off the watch. Talking to friends about questioning your sexuality? Don't let your religious parents touch your phone. Engaging in wrong-think? Better hope Apple doesn't roll over for the fascist government (spoiler, they will).

The risks seem to greatly outweigh the rewards.

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

#119

Post by chrisjj »

Schiendelman wrote: post #10
bondarchuk wrote: post #8

Crazy that this is about to be normalized. Can't help but think the discourse of "they already record everything anyway" of the past couple years (even in the absence of complete proof) has played a part.

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.

> People have identified basically everything coming from the network stack of an iPhone.

And there was me hoping it was sufficiently encrypted.

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

#120

Post by gumby271 »

socalgal2 wrote: post #100
akersten wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Eh, I hope Apple continues to provide this and it forces the needed discussion about how two-party consent requirements are nonsensical. Why should it be illegal for me to remember exactly a conversation that I participated in, instead of only being allowed to have a vague recollection? Laws like this provide cover for abusers and deceivers, by preemptively spoiling objective evidence and making any accusations depen…

It's not illegal for you to remember, it's illegal for you to record. There's a difference. For me, I don't want to live in a world where if I say something embarrassing or not well thought out, someone pushes a button and the last 15 seconds is transcribed as evidence. That's a different world to the previous one where it would be someone's word fori it. As for the fact that phone could already do this, that's not t…

Same with the always-on transcription feature that you dont even need to interact with. I like not having to speak with extreme precision, knowing my words are going into some record.
Post reply on HN