Why does Amazon think people want these products? If I want to search stuff like that I would use my smartphone that is always with me. If I want to search with my voice, then I'll use the voice search found on my smartphone. Why would someone want a device that is always actively listening? Why would I pay 200$ for something that my smartphone already does?
This is in the same vein as the question "why would I want a web browser on my phone? Why wouldn't I just use the web browser on my desktop computer?" As to why you'd want a device that is listening - and does something when its triggered - is that you can arbitrarily activate it with your voice. For example, if your hands are full, or dirty, because maybe you're cooking or changing the oil in your car, or cataloging…
Amazon Echo
291–300 of 746 posts
Re: Amazon Echo
#292Re: Amazon Echo
#293Re: Amazon Echo
#294Earlier quoted context omitted.
i would much rather have a device that i can actually control and trust instead of having to spy on a device that's most likely spying on me in ways i might not like.
And what's great is that your personal preference on these things takes absolutely nothing away from the device itself. I don't think i'll buy one because I have Siri in my pocket at all times, but these privacy concerns aren't absolute truths. They only matter to you because you're sensitive to it.
Re: Amazon Echo
#295Earlier quoted context omitted.
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 "Ale…
You present a scenario that I certainly did not imply, namely that Echo must be performing voice recognition in the cloud. Also, you make it out as though that is the conceivable alternative possible to on-chip voice recognition, from a privacy point of view.
Let me present another scenario to you - Echo keeps "listening" to all our conversations - on-chip of course - but creates additional metadata that is stored locally and uploaded to Amazon servers periodically.
What might theis metadata be?
- Audio streams that were close enough to Echo's threshold for "Alexa", but not quite, thus got rejected (perhaps some of them were falsely rejected, so let's keep a copy to feed our algorithm).
- Data on how often Echo heard voices in the house, from which rooms and at which times. Perhaps Amazon would like to know when a household wakes up, when it likes to listen to music or when to order groceries. Why should Google Now have all the fun?
I could give many more scenarious why Echo might want to retain some data from ambient conversations, so as to make itself more "useful". It needn't store the entire audio stream in these cases, but just metadata or logs.
Such a scenario falls outside your 1 vs. 2 design options; is plausible; useful; and fairly easy to program too. I'm sure there will be many others like that.
My point is - don't implictly trust a closed-source device that is inside your house and always listening in all directions. If Amazon were so careful about the Echo user's privacy, wouldn't they have mentioned the word at least once in the entire page? So let's not rush to give them a free pass till we know they even want it, much less earn it.
P.S. My profile says I'm a "recovering" engineer, not a "recording" one :)
Re: Amazon Echo
#296Jokes on them, I have the squirrels trained as double agents and send them to do things like type in HN comment posts via a public library computer.
Re: Amazon Echo
#297This "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…
> 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 keep out of your house. Do you have any computers in your house? A TV made in the last few years? A smartphone?
> Do you have any computers in your house? A TV made in the last few years? A smartphone?
Neither the first nor the last of those is necessarily always on or Internet connected. (For example, I have both of them, and, with brief exceptions, neither is Internet connected while in my house.)
Re: Amazon Echo
#298This "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…
I mean, when you visit your friend, stop at a girlfriends apartment, or hang out with people at the pub, are you checking if they have any of these devices? Do you search their shelves for an Echo? Do you ask everyone at the restaurant if they have a smartphone with a microphone connected to the internet?
It's impossible to avoid things like this in your life. The second you walk outside, you're surrounded by cameras and microphones that can be streaming anything, to anyone.
Facebook is another example. You might say, I don't want to enter where I live, or where I went to school, I feel that's sensitive information. Well, since you refuse to give up that information, Facebook just encourages your friends to squeal. Hey, does John Doe live in X or Y city? Did you go to university with John Doe? Hey, why don't you upload more photos of John Doe, and tell us the time and location that photo was taken. Actually, no need to tag him, we'll just detect his face, and use the date the photo was created.
It's not going to be long until you can search a person, and see a timeline of their life based on data from third parties. Let's watch John Doe's life for 2018. Oh look, Jan 15, he appears in the background of a tourists photo by the Eiffel tower. Jan 21st, we detected is face on the metro in southern France. Oh, Jan 28th, a car dash cam finds him walking down a street in Italy. Oh, his phone was on and we can see he was in Jane's apartment Feb 1st. Let's pull the audio from the microphone on Jane's television for that day.
Re: Amazon Echo
#299Earlier quoted context omitted.
Privacy is possibly becoming a generation gap issue; throw enough of these against the wall and people will just stop caring until they can quantize a real world impact
You say that, but I think young people are concerned with privacy: see snapchat, etc
Re: Amazon Echo
#300Earlier quoted context omitted.
You say that, but I think young people are concerned with privacy: see snapchat, etc
Snapchat is in no way private.