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

Facebook denies 'listening' to conversations

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 415 posts

Re: Facebook denies 'listening' to conversations

#151

Post by datawarrior »

sillysaurus3 wrote: post #146
tfinniga wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is your question why privacy is important, or are you thinking of something else?

They have to respect our privacy. The moment they don't, it will cause widespread outrage. Once I realized that, it was hard to think of reasons why their actions are wrong.

Having a hard time figuring out if you're serious but if you are then take a look here:

https://www.forbes.com/sites/kashmirhill/2014/06/28/facebook...

That's only one instance of why you should care. There are plenty of others.

Re: Facebook denies 'listening' to conversations

#152

Post by olewhalehunter »

sillysaurus3 wrote: post #131
rickhanlonii wrote: post #103

They're listening, but not to your voice or with a microphone. Facebook is listening to your data--to all of our data, all at once. They have locations, searches, clicks, messaging, photos, hashtags, and any other form of browsing patterns for everyone in your country, everyone in your neighboorhood, everyone in the same room as you. They have enough data with such advanced analysis that on occasion they can get real…

So... Why should we care? If I had to give my father some reasons why this should concern him, I'd come up blank. Maybe you can fill in a few.

They're collecting data on children without their informed consent, babies today have their information capital compromised from the moment they are born, via their parents shares, purchases, and activity, without their say.

Re: Facebook denies 'listening' to conversations

#153

Post by tedunangst »

ehsankia wrote: post #86
0x0 wrote: post #81

Couldn't somebody decompile the android or iOS app and try to find evidence for one way or the other?

Or just have a proper methodology with many samples, control group, etc.

Everybody who has seen a Facebook ad not directly related to a previous conversation upvote this comment. For science.

Re: Facebook denies 'listening' to conversations

#155

Post by jacobush »

sillysaurus3 wrote: post #146
tfinniga wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is your question why privacy is important, or are you thinking of something else?

They have to respect our privacy. The moment they don't, it will cause widespread outrage. Once I realized that, it was hard to think of reasons why their actions are wrong.

I ... don’t know what to say. What they are doing now is respectful?

If we ever come to widespread outrage, it will be much to late. In fact, I don’t think there can be outrage. FB would detect it and make it disappear. Somehow.

Re: Facebook denies 'listening' to conversations

#156

Post by scientistem »

madeofpalk wrote: post #126
austinhutch wrote: post #113

I was skeptical until I experienced an ad in my feed which in my estimation could only attribute to data captured by a conversation had hours earlier. Of course there is the possibility of coincidence but I find it hard to believe. I took advantage of the option to see why I was shown the ad, and was told demographic information, as well as a data partnership with DLX. I would like to know if others who see and ad th…

How many conversations have you had around your phone? How many ads have you seen on FB that matched a conversation that happened earlier? Isn't this the exact definition of confirmation bias?

Well, it’s hard to draw any conclusion about confirmation bias without understanding the first two questions :) but you’re right, this could be baader-meinhof phenomena at work.

Re: Facebook denies 'listening' to conversations

#158

Post by nihonde »

dhimes wrote: post #88
Overtonwindow wrote: post #76

I think the risk versus reward for Facebook and other companies is very high. All things being equal, I think it's more likely than not they will record things, will listen for words you say, and use that. The risk is enormous if it comes out with proof, but let's say they only listen a small percentage of the time, that kind of AI analysis is priceless.

There's no risk. If there was then there would be a statue of Edward Snowden on the National Mall. People are too stupid to care. Maybe I'm just having a bad day.

No, you’re right. There is zero accountability for this kind of stuff. No US government agency or US-based business has ever suffered for it. I defy anyone to prove me wrong.

Re: Facebook denies 'listening' to conversations

#159

Post by elorant »

Sooner or later we'll have to get in the offensive and break their business model by rendering ads ineffective. It's either that or the Internet we used to know won't exist for much longer. As long as they don't seem to give a fuck about user privacy we don't need to play nice.

Re: Facebook denies 'listening' to conversations

#160

Post by mikeash »

sillysaurus3 wrote: post #146
tfinniga wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is your question why privacy is important, or are you thinking of something else?

They have to respect our privacy. The moment they don't, it will cause widespread outrage. Once I realized that, it was hard to think of reasons why their actions are wrong.

Remember when Target snitched to a teenager’s parents that she was pregnant because her purchases fit the “is pregnant” profile, and everyone got outraged, and they stopped profiling people?

Actually, only the first two things happened.

Post reply on HN