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

Google employees are listening to Google Home conversations

translate.google.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

371–380 of 463 posts

Re: Google employees are listening to Google Home conversations

#371

Post by patrick5415 »

yellowapple wrote: post #300
joshuamorton wrote: post #260

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't see the distinction between "if we wish to do a thing, we must do it ethically when doing so" (4) and "we must act ethically if we do a thing" (5). If training data can't be collected ethically, do you think group 4 still would, or something? That just seems like trying to out yourself on an ethical high horse without a real distinction in action.

The distinction (from how I'm reading the GP's comment) is that Group 4 presupposes that data collection is necessary, and seeks to minimize unethical means of collecting that data, while Group 5 presupposes that ethics are paramount, and seeks to establish whether or not data collection can actually be ethical at all. That is: Group 4 would be more willing to compromise ethics if absolutely necessary to get the data…

I agree. The way way the categories are worded essentially excludes the possibility that maybe we shouldn’t be training these models at all. We have banned potentially insightful experiments in both medicine and psychology because they are unethical. I see no reason ML should get a pass.

Re: Google employees are listening to Google Home conversations

#372

Post by neilpointer »

gringoDan wrote: post #95

I think the responses to this can be broken down into a 2x2 matrix: level of concern vs. understanding of technology. 1) Don't understand ML; not concerned - "I have nothing to hide." 2) Don't understand ML; concerned - "I bought this device and now people are spying on me!" 3) Understand ML; not concerned - "Of course, Google needs to label its training data." 4) Understand ML; concerned - "How can we train models/c…

I'm between 3 and 4: I just want proof that they remove PII from the audio files. If it's a bunch of audio files with unique IDs and metadata like time of day, count me as a member of group 3.

Re: Google employees are listening to Google Home conversations

#373

Post by inflatableDodo »

outworlder wrote: post #336
cronix wrote: post #307

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm in the 5th category. 5) Understand ML; concerned - won't allow any of these things in my house period because they will always use them for things behind the scenes that they won't state. I don't care how well trained they are, or "ethical." Ethical... according to who, and at what time period in the future? Ethics change. The data they have on you won't. Look at all of the politicians and other people getting in…

Before I go further: do you own a smartphone? If not, you can ignore the rest. So, assuming you have a smartphone. That is a device which has: - Permanent network connection. Doesn't matter what you do on your Wifi, it has the cellular data network. Which is controlled by an independent processor with its own firmware - Excellent noise-cancellation microphones. They may not be able to pinpoint the sound source like a…

>Before I go further: do you own a smartphone?

Someone really needs to make a decent modular smartphone with a detachable radio.

Re: Google employees are listening to Google Home conversations

#374

Post by air7 »

Anything you put online can potentially leak.

This is common knowledge for us tech oriented people but with time (and stories such as these) it is (hopefully) becoming more and more general knowledge.

Personally I'm ok with it: If I use a cloud based voice enabled device, I accept that my voice might be heard by someone working there. Similarly, if one sends nude pics as a "private" message in messenger, they shouldn't be surprised if someone at FB sees them. Know the risk, evaluate the benefit, and make an informed decision.

One caveat is the explicitness of "put online": The above holds for things put up deliberately, not for things uploaded accidentally or covertly. In these cases the data is illegally obtained and therefor, imo, not important for this discussion. That's because I (naively) don't think big companies would risk a large scale purposefully illegal enterprise (and if they do, there should be major ramifications) and 3LA can spy on anyone anyway if they want, and that's (currently) legal/above the law.

Re: Google employees are listening to Google Home conversations

#375

Post by icebraining »

blackflame7000 wrote: post #350
georgebarnett wrote: post #338

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No it’s not. Google has many primary concerns it needs to manage. That’s how you get big - by managing lots of concerns successfully. If they drop one too long, they start going backwards very quickly.

Then explain why they changed to Alphabet. Shareholders were sick of things like project loon, siphoning cash from google search. You are extremely naive if you think there are many concerns of higher importance than profit. Everything else is about maintaining and growing profit even if that means doing an ad campaign convincing people you are fighting the good fight..for profit.

> Then explain why they changed to Alphabet. Shareholders were sick of things like project loon, siphoning cash from google search.

Alphabet is still spending billions from Google into "other bets" like Loon, so I don't see how this explains the change.

Re: Google employees are listening to Google Home conversations

#376

Post by mikeash »

blackflame7000 wrote: post #370
vkou wrote: post #265

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The shareholder value theory is rubbish, because it has no predictive or descriptive powers for why one decision was made over another. I can just as easily say that the best way to maximize shareholder value is to minimize public scandal, scrutiny, and potential for legislature. Nearly every single decision, including contradictory ones, made by every single company, everywhere, can be retroactively justified to hav…

> I can just as easily say that the best way to maximize shareholder value is to minimize public scandal, scrutiny, and potential for legislature. Scandals can get free marketing, for example, Nike and Colin Kaepernick. Attention is always better than no attention at all for a business. Every single decision is made to increase profit but there might be many things that need to be accomplished first so its hard to se…

This is a wonderfully condescending response but it answers nothing. The question was, why can’t google do it differently? This doesn’t answer the question. We can plainly see this from the fact that other companies, operating under the same conditions you describe, make different choices.

This is the business equivalent of saying “because physics.” It’s not wrong, it’s just not useful.

Re: Google employees are listening to Google Home conversations

#377

Post by bscphil »

outworlder wrote: post #336
cronix wrote: post #307

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm in the 5th category. 5) Understand ML; concerned - won't allow any of these things in my house period because they will always use them for things behind the scenes that they won't state. I don't care how well trained they are, or "ethical." Ethical... according to who, and at what time period in the future? Ethics change. The data they have on you won't. Look at all of the politicians and other people getting in…

Before I go further: do you own a smartphone? If not, you can ignore the rest. So, assuming you have a smartphone. That is a device which has: - Permanent network connection. Doesn't matter what you do on your Wifi, it has the cellular data network. Which is controlled by an independent processor with its own firmware - Excellent noise-cancellation microphones. They may not be able to pinpoint the sound source like a…

> Similar functionality to an Echo / Google Home / Apple whatever. They'll be listening for "hey siri" or "ok google"

This seems to be a pretty big assumption, without which your whole argument falls apart. In my case, at least, I have no such functionality enabled. You could argue that the manufacturer of my phone could push a software update that enables it without my knowledge (in fact, they likely couldn't, because I don't have automatic updates turned on), but even if this were true we're now arguing about a very different thing - the theoretical ability of MegaCorp to spy on me as opposed to actual known spying.

Re: Google employees are listening to Google Home conversations

#378

Post by ilikepi »

inflatableDodo wrote: post #373
outworlder wrote: post #336

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Before I go further: do you own a smartphone? If not, you can ignore the rest. So, assuming you have a smartphone. That is a device which has: - Permanent network connection. Doesn't matter what you do on your Wifi, it has the cellular data network. Which is controlled by an independent processor with its own firmware - Excellent noise-cancellation microphones. They may not be able to pinpoint the sound source like a…

>Before I go further: do you own a smartphone? Someone really needs to make a decent modular smartphone with a detachable radio.

It's not quite what you're asking for, but Apple does still sell the iPod Touch, and they recently revved it. One could pair that with a mobile hotspot with a power button...

Re: Google employees are listening to Google Home conversations

#379

Post by inflatableDodo »

ilikepi wrote: post #378
inflatableDodo wrote: post #373

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Before I go further: do you own a smartphone? Someone really needs to make a decent modular smartphone with a detachable radio.

It's not quite what you're asking for, but Apple does still sell the iPod Touch, and they recently revved it. One could pair that with a mobile hotspot with a power button...

I have been considering a battery powered raspberry pi with a usb hotspot and a virtual phone number.

Re: Google employees are listening to Google Home conversations

#380

Post by pdonis »

basch wrote: post #356
pdonis wrote: post #340

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On my smartphone I can at least turn off the apps that would automatically listen for voice commands; I can use the phone just fine without them. And if I thought there was enough of a threat that Google or someone else was listening in using my phone's microphone without my knowledge, even with the apps turned off, I would switch to a rooted phone that would give me more control. For the Echo/Google Home/etc. device…

Theres a mute button on the echo. You can turn voice off just the same as you can on a phone.

> Theres a mute button on the echo.

Which defeats the whole purpose of having it, namely, to respond to voice commands.

> You can turn voice off just the same as you can on a phone.

I don't have to turn off voice altogether on my phone, I just have to turn off the apps that I don't trust. On an Echo, either I turn it off and might as well not have it, or I turn it on and it's recording everything. There's no middle ground where I get some basic functionality without being spied on.

Post reply on HN