Live data from Hacker News

The $10 Echo

sammachin.com

121–128 of 128 posts

Re: The $10 Echo

#121
post #88

Any recommendations for microphones that are (a) high-quality, (b) cheap (under US$5.00), (c) small (under a cubic centimeter), and (d) with analog output (such as a 1/8-inch plug)? Note that high-quality and cheap are not contradictory requirements. iPhones and other smartphones have extremely high-quality microphones (and they are tiny ) and must certainly cost much less than $5 as a part, but they seem impossible…

Electret microphone capsule with couple of transistors preamp can give very good results, but requires some electronics skills I guess...

Re: The $10 Echo

#122
post #84
post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Everyone has an accent. Do you mean that you speak General American (i.e. the North East non-coastal accent)?

Of course you're technically correct, but I find it quite common for Americans to understand that "no accent" refers to General American, even if they're not aware of the term "General American."

It's not just pedantics. I live in the UK, and some people who speak something between Received Pronunciation and the BBC accent also think they have no accent. People can't hear their own accents and presume they don't have any.

Re: The $10 Echo

#123
post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What do you use it for? I love the idea of Echo, but I can't think of enough I'd do with it to warrant buying one.

Ever tried to call somebody while cooking? As a dad who spends most of his home time in the kitchen cooking and cleaning and parenting, hands-free tech is glorious.

The echo doesn't allow you to place or pick up calls (yet).

Re: The $10 Echo

#124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Silly. The traffic from the Echo has been studied extensively. Detection of the wake word is hardware-based. Nothing is recorded and sent until the wake word is uttered and after that only the part until you finish your question. If you are truly worried about spy devices, you should really consider dropping your cell phone in the toilet. (Yes, I love my echo)

What do you use it for? I love the idea of Echo, but I can't think of enough I'd do with it to warrant buying one.

Delayed response - My main uses are simple things like asking about the weather (current and future), listening to the flash briefing and asking random things while watching TV, asking what's on the family calendar. Had it hooked up to a smartthings hub for a bit, which worked, but the smartthings platform has issues so I've abandoned the idea of smart home control. Will buy a Philips Hue system in the next few weeks.

My wife, who hates gadgets in general, likes it in the kitchen to add stuff to her shopping list while cooking (with messy hands). In the store she opens the echo app and checks off everything on the list. It seems like a silly thing, but she thinks it's terrific and it has saved us many useless return trips to the store. She also loves the option to play music (again, for the same reason, messy hands or just busy).

My 7yo uses it for music, to get the answers to trivia and interact with a few 'skills' I've enabled (guess the animal, etc). She also "plays with Alexa" when friends come over (they take turns requesting songs and dancing)

The echo is not ideal, especially in terms of underlying knowledge base, integration with other Amazon devices (we have two firetv boxes, amazon owns IMDB, mysteriously neither are well-supported or integrated) and the "skills" approach is cumbersome (should have used an "intent" approach instead of "ask {skill}"), but voice recognition is better than anything I've used and it works for everyone in the family without training, as well as random guests, including kids.

PS I signed up early and bought it for $99, a second one was requested, but I feel the regular price of $179 is too high with the current feature set.

Note: It does NOT (yet) allow handsfree calling. I wish it did.

Re: The $10 Echo

#125
post #27

I love my echo (alexa), especially the convenience of "no button but wake word" when I have my hands full in the kitchen. That said, google voice is so much better at parsing my questions that I'd pay a bunch of money for another standalone device with wake word which would integrate with with google voice. Any chance of hacking that, or linking your device with both? (Ask Amazon / Ask Google)

Buy an high end phone with a good mic and you can choose between GoogleNow and Siri (and more). Or if you have a SmartTV in your kitchen, you can use that too (Samsung, LG, etc),

I have all of those, but it really doesn't compare. Echo does an amazing job recognizing every voice (without training) from a great distance.

Re: The $10 Echo

#126
post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of course you're technically correct, but I find it quite common for Americans to understand that "no accent" refers to General American, even if they're not aware of the term "General American."

It's not just pedantics. I live in the UK, and some people who speak something between Received Pronunciation and the BBC accent also think they have no accent. People can't hear their own accents and presume they don't have any.

But this is more than just my bias for my own accent (which is very close to GA). When I meet other Americans with other regional accents, they will often describe me as having "no accent."

Re: The $10 Echo

#127
post #5

[deleted]

Silly. The traffic from the Echo has been studied extensively. Detection of the wake word is hardware-based. Nothing is recorded and sent until the wake word is uttered and after that only the part until you finish your question. If you are truly worried about spy devices, you should really consider dropping your cell phone in the toilet. (Yes, I love my echo)

> The traffic from the Echo has been studied extensively.

cool, got a link to those?

mainly out of interest reading about such systems and DSP, btw.

actual trust could only come from open source--"this closed source, auto-updating software hasn't been observed to send sensitive data over the network so far" is something I might as well take your word for :-)

Re: The $10 Echo

#128
post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The traffic from the Echo has been studied extensively. Detection of the wake word is hardware-based For now, maybe. If some update changed this, how and when would you figure out? I'd say it's not entirely silly to be worried about something in your home which is controlled by a third party and could turn into a spying device at any moment, even though it seems not to have become evil yet.

>If some update changed this, how and when would you figure out The echo traffic always flows through your internet - it has no 3G/4G hardware, for example. If you want to do a pcap with tcpdump or similar, you can. When I first received mine, I set up a packet capture on my linux firewall/ips/nat device and looked at traffic outbound to the internet from the echo. If I was particularly paranoid, I could leave this r…

> If you are truly worried about spy devices, you should really consider dropping your cell phone in the toilet.

> Honestly, if you're worried about this sort of thing, you shouldn't own a cell phone.

People keep saying this but not owning a cell phone doesn't help against being in the vicinity of a far-field microphone connected to echo?

Then your idea about pcapping 24/7, I'm not sure what this data would look like, but given that the software emitting it is closed-source and auto-updating, wouldn't it change every other update or so? You'd have to re-reverse the data every time to see what it's actually sending, sounds like a lot of work, like keeping an eye on a young child to make sure it's not creating/getting into any trouble.

You can call it "paranoid", but I think by now we have all seen enough reports about these sorts of things going wrong (on purpose or by accident), it's more reasonable to say that you are okay trading convenience for privacy+security than calling the people who aren't, "paranoid". It's 2016.

BTW if you can make sense of the pcapped data sent out, that means it's not encrypted, right?

Post reply on HN