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

Amazon Echo

amazon.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 746 posts

Re: Amazon Echo

#231

Post by johnloeber »

asafira wrote: post #159

While most of the posts are, and probably should be, concerned with the privacy implications of this device if/when it reaches peoples' homes, I also wonder the plain-old "will this flop?" Adding voice recognition to things isn't a new idea, and the threshold for when it's "good enough" for the general populace for any use case is pretty poorly understood and/or quantified. Is this a use case people would be interest…

>Is this much better than just having a really good smartphone with voice recognition that's connected to speakers in the house?

It doesn't look like it. Maybe it has a better microphone? In any case, this seems like a function that could be just as easily accomplished by a smartphone. (Maybe this is a wasted Fire-phone opportunity?)

Re: Amazon Echo

#232

Post by jasode »

r0h1n wrote: post #194
Someone1234 wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Incorrect. The device is always listening, waiting for you to say "Alexa" so that it can start acting upon your commands. You say "incorrect" then re-phase exactly what I said in a different way but retain exactly the same meaning. The detection of the key word is on-chip. That's all that matters. Until the chip signals that it was spoken nothing is transmitted. > So no, this isn't "pathetic baseless fear mongering…

What you are saying is technologically correct, possible and prevalent but I couldn't find Amazon saying it anywhere on their page. Can you point me to the part where Amazon says nothing is ever stored/transmitted unless "Alexa" is spoken?

I noticed that your profile mentioned "recording engineer" so maybe some concrete numbers related to digital audio technology will put boundaries on plausible scenarios.

We assume either of 2 engineering designs:

(#1) the trigger word "Alexa" is detected within an embedded chip. The DSP (digital signal processing) intelligence for analyzing sound waveforms is inside the device. Therefore, the words spoken after "Alexa" are then sent to the cloud.

(#2) the trigger word "Alexa" (and/or other words) are detected remotely via cloud computers. There is no "smart" DSP chip within the Echo device. That means that the device must send a constant 24/7 stream of digital waveforms to the cloud.

If we continue on the #2 scenario, we can guesstimate what data transfer volumes would look like. To be conservative, we use 8kHz 8-bit audio as the parameters which is telephone quality. (Reliable voice recognition probably requires inputs with greater audio fidelity e.g. 16-bit 32kHz but we'll keep the 8kHz-8bit as a possible lower bound.)

Using 8kHz-8bit, it means that the device would have to stream 691 megabytes a day which leads to 20.7 gigabytes a month. Likewise on the back end, the amazon infrastructure would have to scale up to constantly analyze millions of parallel 24/7 digital waveforms. The amazon datacenters would be burning up terawatts of electricity to ignore the 99.99% of digital waveforms that is not the word "Alexa".

So, are there any consumer devices out there surreptitiously uploading 691 megabytes of digital waveforms (or any data) every single day? Is it realistic that Amazon would engineer the product to work like this?

I have a router that has a fallback option to a cellular connection in case my cable is disrupted. I and others would hate to get a surprise bill from Verizon/AT&T for going over my 2GB/month transfer limit if the amazon device was designed via scenario #2.

EDIT TO ADD scenario #3:

(#3) there are unpublicized/secret list of words in addition to the documented "Alexa" within the embedded chip's "vocabulary". Such words might be "vacation" and "book" and depending on the subsequent words sent to the cloud, you'd see ads for suntan lotion or Stephen King novels on your next visit to amazon.com. The chip's vocabulary may also include listening for transient sounds like dog barks or sneezes. You'd then get ads for dog food and cold medicine. In this scenario, a constant digital waveform is not uploaded 24/7 but extra trigger keywords unknown to the consumer causes more data to be sent than he/she agreed to.

Re: Amazon Echo

#233

Post by headgasket »

justcommenting wrote: post #219
asafira wrote: post #159

While most of the posts are, and probably should be, concerned with the privacy implications of this device if/when it reaches peoples' homes, I also wonder the plain-old "will this flop?" Adding voice recognition to things isn't a new idea, and the threshold for when it's "good enough" for the general populace for any use case is pretty poorly understood and/or quantified. Is this a use case people would be interest…

i think you're underestimating how deeply entrenched 'surveillance as a business model' has become amongst leading american tech companies in recent years. this has much less to do with latent consumer demand than companies wanting to leverage that information for advertising and related purposes and desperately trying to craft a value proposition that justifies and normalizes more intrusive forms of data collection.

Can/will this lead to a stifling of true innovation? If this existed and there was one in that the famed Apple garage, or in the house rented by Zuck and his friends, would IBM have let Apple happen, or Google let the FB grow? How many prescient individuals (the future is already here, just not evenly distributed, as Gibson said) do you need to spy on to "manage" innovation in a way to prevent disruption? Could this surveillance era be the beginning of a technology dark age? What really disruptive things have happened since iphone(2007)?

(edit typo)

Re: Amazon Echo

#234

Post by slouch »

r0h1n wrote: post #194
Someone1234 wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Incorrect. The device is always listening, waiting for you to say "Alexa" so that it can start acting upon your commands. You say "incorrect" then re-phase exactly what I said in a different way but retain exactly the same meaning. The detection of the key word is on-chip. That's all that matters. Until the chip signals that it was spoken nothing is transmitted. > So no, this isn't "pathetic baseless fear mongering…

What you are saying is technologically correct, possible and prevalent but I couldn't find Amazon saying it anywhere on their page. Can you point me to the part where Amazon says nothing is ever stored/transmitted unless "Alexa" is spoken?

"prove this doesn't happen"

Re: Amazon Echo

#235

Post by javert »

chatmasta wrote: post #87

This "internet-of-things" trend coincides unfortunately with the "dragnet surveillance" trend. With every new product launch from a "cloud company," I increasingly feel as if I'm reading the tombstone of modern society. The selling point behind these devices is convenience, but at the cost of security. I don't think I need to explain to HN why an always-on, internet connected voice recording device is something to ke…

> Yes, I'm trying to get on a list at the NSA

I have a running joke about this with my mom. The particular list that people like you and me get put on is called the "patriot file." Fortunately, it's way too big of a list for them to follow up on thoroughly, so if your phone conversation (or comment) ends up there, you're really OK.

Re: Amazon Echo

#236

Post by reitanqild »

edderly wrote: post #138
r0h1n wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> you have to say the word "Alexa" for it to start listening Incorrect. The device is always listening, waiting for you to say "Alexa" so that it can start acting upon your commands. I'd take Amazon's claim that no data is transmitted or stored without the wake word "Alexa" purely at face value. There have been enough examples of devices and corporations collecting/sending data they weren't meant to in the past few y…

Do you mean like 'Ok Google'? on a typical Android device? Ok, that only works on the Launcher but I'm also familiar with tech on Qualcomm devices which does the voice keyword recognition in hardware. So this isn't anything new.

"From any screen" definitely is one of the choices in Google Now settings, at least on Note II.

Re: Amazon Echo

#237

Post by wtetzner »

chaostheory wrote: post #141
skorgu wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The website makes clear that the listen-and-answer /behavior/ isn't activated unless triggered. That's absolutely not evidence in either direction for what happens in the non-triggered case. For example the idea that there's a debug mode that dumps the whole audio stream for troubleshooting isn't exactly tinfoil-hat paranoia.

How do you really know? How do you know that it won't be processing sound without the trigger when they get served with some government request? Is this in the terms and conditions? Is this in the privacy policy? Yes the original post is making an assumption, but you are as well.

I think you misunderstood skorgu's post. I think you're both in agreement. He was saying Echo won't act on anything without first hearing "Alexa," (as in, perform the action you're asking it to) but that we don't know if it will be transmitting the voice data.

Re: Amazon Echo

#238

Post by mod »

cvburgess wrote: post #199
leeber wrote: post #192

To everyone worried about privacy: We all trust our e-mail to be stored in the cloud, we store sensitive files etc on services like dropbox, we trust that our operating systems aren't collecting/sending data, etc. You're already using and relying upon MANY services with the ability (if they really wanted to) to steal TONS of private information from you. It all comes down to trust. But don't pretend like this opens u…

The main selling point of a macbook is not that it can identify exactly what you say, when you said it, and send that data back to a central server that is "always getting smarter". There is also a VERY big difference for me between the things that I type into my computer and the conversations I have in my home. I say many things in an imperfect form or with a dry sense of humor - I rarely save incomplete or out-of-c…

But the macbook can do that, possibly better in fact, as it has more resources at its disposal to analyze your audio.

As GP said, you're trusting that it doesn't.

Re: Amazon Echo

#239

Post by lordbusiness »

VikingCoder wrote: post #167
Someone1234 wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Incorrect. The device is always listening, waiting for you to say "Alexa" so that it can start acting upon your commands. You say "incorrect" then re-phase exactly what I said in a different way but retain exactly the same meaning. The detection of the key word is on-chip. That's all that matters. Until the chip signals that it was spoken nothing is transmitted. > So no, this isn't "pathetic baseless fear mongering…

Yes, it's possible the technology respects your privacy. But it's not open source. Therefore it's technically possible that Echo waits until you make a request, and then bursts a transcript of everything ELSE you've said, as well. Or maybe the device only does that if Amazon receives a valid Search Warrant, and they flag your device to enter "transcript mode." Or even "live, continuous broadcast." People have a right…

"Never argue with a fool, onlookers may not be able to tell the difference."

-- Mark Twain

Pro-tip, when people make such outlandish comments and call people idiots en-masse, (which I am amazed hasn't been flagged away), just ignore them. :-)

Re: Amazon Echo

#240

Post by mod »

colinbartlett wrote: post #200
leeber wrote: post #192

To everyone worried about privacy: We all trust our e-mail to be stored in the cloud, we store sensitive files etc on services like dropbox, we trust that our operating systems aren't collecting/sending data, etc. You're already using and relying upon MANY services with the ability (if they really wanted to) to steal TONS of private information from you. It all comes down to trust. But don't pretend like this opens u…

That's the worst argument I've ever seen. "You either trust them with everything or you don't."

Can you elaborate? The argument made sense to me.
Post reply on HN