221–230 of 328 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah, that's probably true. My bad. I am not insecure (I think !?!?) but it would be nifty to have Alexa tell me that "harshaw, those jeans you are wearing have a giant stain and you should get a clean pair out of the drawer".
I already have some built in sensors that let me know if there are stains on my pants.
The HN reaction to this device is what I expected: we're somewhere between suspicious and terrified. I'll be really fascinated to know how the wider market reacts. I was one of those who believed consumers would look at the always-on living room microphone with suspicion. But I think the lesson was pretty clear that people will trade privacy for convenience. (Likely an overabundance of trust or a lack of understandin…
Even trying to see this from an outsider perspective it seems like a stupid product. As someone else pointed out, they've replaced looking in the dang mirror with a multi-step process involving a few hundred dollars of tech at least. They made sure to throw in "cloud" and "machine learning", but the average consumer doesn't care about that.
Even if this product isn't a massive success, the units they do move will have a huge potential impact to their retail clothing lines.
Now, instead of suggesting clothing items in the store based on other items you've looked at, they can now suggest clothing items in their sales material based on what you already own and look good wearing.
If I had this product and Amazon started sending me curated outfits that they knew would look great on me and matched my style, I'd probably start using Amazon exclusively to fill out my wardrobe.
As it stands now, I buy almost everything EXCEPT clothes through Amazon and prefer to let my wife buy me things she wants me to wear.
This product, on it's own, is a game changer in the fashion industry. Now Amazon has a compelling and unique product that is going to make it increasingly difficult for other retail outlets to compete in the same space.
And once we start seeing "apps" for this camera that auto-instagram/snapchat your pictures, I think we're going to see a huge demand in the teen/millennial female market for what is kind of a geeky niche product.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I was one of those who believed consumers would look at the always-on living room microphone with suspicion. But I think the lesson was pretty clear that people will trade privacy for convenience. I don't think it's a matter of trading privacy for convenience, as long as you believe Amazon when they say they're not sending anything when you're not using the wake word. All evidence points towards this being the case…
> But I think the lesson was pretty clear that people will trade privacy for convenience. Not everywhere. In Germany, Amazon Echo isn't nearly as popular.
They seem to imply that humans may see your Style Check photos (ostensibly "our team of experienced fashion specialists" for machine learning purposes). I'm wondering a bit if that team of fashion specialists is Mechanical Turk?
Also given that all the pixs in the ad are women, we can assume if Alexa sees a little baby bulge and the other signs of pregnancy that your amazon advertisements are about to take a huge swing to the maternity style.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's not usually recording you while you are changing.
How do you know? Amazon says their camera only records you when you ask it to, if you don't trust them, then how do you trust that your cellphone or laptop isn't recording you illicitly?
The HN reaction to this device is what I expected: we're somewhere between suspicious and terrified. I'll be really fascinated to know how the wider market reacts. I was one of those who believed consumers would look at the always-on living room microphone with suspicion. But I think the lesson was pretty clear that people will trade privacy for convenience. (Likely an overabundance of trust or a lack of understandin…
Google says that my phone isn't recording me, and I just have to trust it. People have confirmed this to be true.
I don't see a difference.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Even trying to see this from an outsider perspective it seems like a stupid product. As someone else pointed out, they've replaced looking in the dang mirror with a multi-step process involving a few hundred dollars of tech at least. They made sure to throw in "cloud" and "machine learning", but the average consumer doesn't care about that.
I think you may be missing the brilliance of this product from a sales perspective. Even if this product isn't a massive success, the units they do move will have a huge potential impact to their retail clothing lines. Now, instead of suggesting clothing items in the store based on other items you've looked at, they can now suggest clothing items in their sales material based on what you already own and look good wea…
I'm not normally one to be creeped out by these kind of things. But this is a device that's designed to take photos and videos of you while you get dressed, and will be both connected to the internet and constantly communicating those images over the network. This feels like a device literature professors would use to teach dystopian fiction writing. edit: case in point - matthewmcg's comment https://news.ycombinator…
Just the first camera shot in that ad was already creepy as fuck.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I mean, i love all these tools, i just don't want them to have any form of internet access. It's why i'm building my home cloud and automation system, but only doing so if the devices don't leave my firewall. I enjoy the tech, i enjoy the complication (to a degree) , it's fun gadget stuff, it's nifty. However i do not trust them to keep my information safe, even if i trusted them to not misuse it themselves (which i…
>> I mean, i love all these tools, i just don't want them to have any form of internet access. I've come to the realisation that the only way I will have a 'home of the future' is if I build it myself and keep it offline. I love lots of the IOT products and when they eventually come down in price they would be no brainers. But my privacy isn't worth the benefit they provide.
$2000 device that takes up space and electricity to do the same thing, but in minutes
I personally like the second option a lot better, I wish we had an open source version of all the google apps that did it's own ML on your own servers.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There's a much more immediately practical reason to keep it in-firewall as well: if the utility company accidentally cuts a fiber line outside my house, I don't want to be suddenly unable to turn off my hallway light.
Maybe building codes could spec that home automation devices must have local controls. The companies aren't going to do it without regulation.