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

Statistical Analysis shows Echos process voice to serve ads

arxiv.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 125 posts

Re: Statistical Analysis shows Echos process voice to serve ads

#111

Post by jldugger »

samhw wrote: post #99
jasonlotito wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What part of the paper gives you the impression they imply voice assistants are listening to everything? For me, it's this: "Your Echos are Heard" So, the opening salvo. That's what gives me the impression they imply voice assistances are listening to everything. I don't refer to voice commands or normal interaction as "echos" so the user of the word "echos" here implies something nefarious. Sure, it's the name of…

Quoted post unavailable.

Is there a name for when people giving advice fail to heed their own warning? Perhaps a humorously long german word.

Re: Statistical Analysis shows Echos process voice to serve ads

#112

Post by yunohn »

fddhjjj wrote: post #56
yunohn wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Alexa uses the data we give to it by speaking and performing actions via downloaded skills - is very similar to all ad platforms, conveying user intent into ad profiles. Saying “process voice for ads” has subtle connotations in the current landscape of privacy discussions.

As clarification, you are objecting to the phrase “process voice to [serve] ads” in the title which was provided by the submitter not the paper authors?

From the abstract:

> We find that Amazon processes voice data to infer user interests and uses it to serve targeted ads on-platform

Re: Statistical Analysis shows Echos process voice to serve ads

#114

Post by samhw »

oehpr wrote: post #109
samhw wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Quoted post unavailable.

Wu.. WOW That was a hostile response for what seemed like a reasonable position. Tell me samhw: If I told you I had a bunch of echos in my garage. Would you be wondering why I just said "I have a bunch of voice commands issued to my echo in my garage"? No. You would not. It's not an unreasonable position So tell me why it deserved that response.

Sorry, I don't mean to be overly harsh, but your comment amounts to

> I personally don't use the word 'echo' in connection to vocal communication, which (for some incomprehensible reason) means that, when someone else uses the word 'echo' thusly, they are implying something nefarious.

> Oh, and not just something nefarious, but specifically that they are eavesdropping on every word you say (also: every breath you take, every move you make, &c). Somehow.

> In summation: they are spying on everything you say, because they used the word 'echo' in their marketing material about a voice assistant. QED.

I mean, this is barely even intelligible as a line of reasoning. I assumed it was dashed off quickly and without really thinking. If it represents your considered opinion, then perhaps I'm missing something very obvious, I don't know.

Re: Statistical Analysis shows Echos process voice to serve ads

#115

Post by edm0nd »

krnlpnc wrote: post #96

It's baffling that so many people insist this is not happening, or that it's too computationally expensive. On several occasions I've seen ads appear based upon things being discussed, but never searched. Always with the realization I was near a smart device with a microphone (or an app with permissions) I think in hindsight this will be similar to the realization that systems like XKeyscore and PRISM were not only t…

Smart speakers and phones are NOT listening to every single thing around it 24/7 in order to serve you ads. That's simply just not how it works. There are hundreds of other data points on you that can be used for this like your AMEX/Visa/Mastercard purchase history and etc.

On top of that, it would be easily detected via networking monitoring.

Re: Statistical Analysis shows Echos process voice to serve ads

#116

Post by Dylan16807 »

dr_dshiv wrote: post #44
mellavora wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Worse! You report this information to government authorities, who monitor this and may decide at a future time that the things you were shopping for today mark you as a bad or suspicious person. Worse! You also share this information with credit bureaus, meaning the data is available to potential employers. Thus limiting your job options. Looked at a hookah once because you were curious? Sorry, no pot-heads in my com…

I don’t see the connection of this to the topic. Not trying to be obtuse. Are you saying it’s a slippery slope between targeted advertisements and 1984? In my store analogy, I’m trying to make discourse on this topic less black and white. To recognize that data collection is not some inherent evil. And sure, to point out that a store that tries to peep in your bedroom window should be called to task.

> that tries to peep in your bedroom window

That's not really the argument your opponent has.

It's that pervasive data collection, even if it's 'only' outside your house, is quite bad.

> I’m trying to make discourse on this topic less black and white.

Then you need to rethink your framing, because right now you're trying to split it into "store tracks transactions by itself and uses that data itself" and "tries to peep in your bedroom window".

Everyone else is talking about shades of gray too. But they're pointing out that 90% of the store-tracking shades have significant negative consequences.

Re: Statistical Analysis shows Echos process voice to serve ads

#117

Post by jldugger »

samhw wrote: post #114
oehpr wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wu.. WOW That was a hostile response for what seemed like a reasonable position. Tell me samhw: If I told you I had a bunch of echos in my garage. Would you be wondering why I just said "I have a bunch of voice commands issued to my echo in my garage"? No. You would not. It's not an unreasonable position So tell me why it deserved that response.

Sorry, I don't mean to be overly harsh, but your comment amounts to > I personally don't use the word 'echo' in connection to vocal communication, which (for some incomprehensible reason) means that, when someone else uses the word 'echo' thusly , they are implying something nefarious. > Oh, and not just something nefarious, but specifically that they are eavesdropping on every word you say (also: every breath you ta…

> this is barely even intelligible as a line of reasoning.

You are literally engaging in a straw-man argument. Nobody said any of those things verbatim, no matter how much you wish they had. This is bad-faith commenting and you should consider taking a break to de-escalate.

> perhaps I'm missing something very obvious

The title "Your Echos are Heard" is a pun. One meaning of "Echos" is the Amazon product, and the other is a vocalization reflected back. It's stretch, to the point where it's technically spelled wrong for one of the meanings of the word. But it's a pun re-enforced with the word "heard" and thats enough for people to make the connection.

The complaint is that the article title heavily _implies_ the study finds devices are listening to your conversations unprompted, without actually doing any such science. The clickbait title is bad enough, but when there's already a partisan comment brigade ready to claim that "science is on their side" it's definitely worse.

Re: Statistical Analysis shows Echos process voice to serve ads

#118

Post by pbhjpbhj »

camgunz wrote: post #73

I'm always surprised at others' surprise that voice assistants are data gatherers for ads (maybe except for Siri?). Isn't the entire business model just 2 things: - Gather data for ads - Corner the "smart assistant" market... so you can gather more data for ads

I think because the companies have stated outright that they're not using voice data for advertising, and people assume large companies aren't committing fraud against them.

Re: Statistical Analysis shows Echos process voice to serve ads

#119

Post by loxias »

I'm surprised that anyone is surprised by this.

A bit more than a decade ago, in a meeting at Lab126 where we were discussing a then secret future product with voice recognition -- in particular "keyword spotting", so that it could wake up on command -- I said something like: "I doubt this will work, to get high enough accuracy we'd have to stream data constantly for analysis, and consumers would have to expect this. No one would buy it."

I've since learned never to underestimate the naivete of others.

Re: Statistical Analysis shows Echos process voice to serve ads

#120

Post by dr_dshiv »

Nextgrid wrote: post #82
dr_dshiv wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I thought this was a topic about Alexa (a voice UI) using your voice (actually, installed skills) to deliver more targeted ads. I don’t see the public discourse connection here?

It's only a matter of time before Alexa will only read you the "right" kind of news as to remain advertiser-friendly. It already happens on mainstream social media, where beyond actual illegal content, plenty of legal content but that happens to be critical of the proverbial "establishment" gets demonetized, banned or even silently shadowbanned.

But that phenomenon isn’t specific to targeting, is it? That’s just run of the mill propaganda.
Post reply on HN