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

Amazon Echo Show

amazon.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

401–410 of 467 posts

Re: Amazon Echo Show

#401

Post by jameshart »

curun1r wrote: post #133
mikeash wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are we ever going to see unity between these services, or are we doomed to have little walled-off fiefdoms forever? A phone number works anywhere in the world, to anywhere in the world, with anyone who has a phone. All e-mail providers work with each other. I don't care who you're with, and I wouldn't even have to know except it's usually part of the address. SMS works no matter which provider we both have. It feels…

FWIW, email only sorta interoperates...try running your own mail server and unless you get all the elements of server reputation exactly right, your email will probably not get delivered to people using the large email providers. Thanks to spammers, we've allowed our open, interoperable standard to be much more closed. And SMS is also frustratingly non-universal. After years of having cell service with one of the lar…

That's nothing - you should try running your own cell tower. Or just hooking up your own telephone exchange.

Email interoperability is at LEAST as good as phone interoperability, which was the GP's point, I think. But all of these things are more walled gardens than you might think.

Re: Amazon Echo Show

#402

Post by jstandard »

test6554 wrote: post #342
mikeash wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are we ever going to see unity between these services, or are we doomed to have little walled-off fiefdoms forever? A phone number works anywhere in the world, to anywhere in the world, with anyone who has a phone. All e-mail providers work with each other. I don't care who you're with, and I wouldn't even have to know except it's usually part of the address. SMS works no matter which provider we both have. It feels…

Email and phone spam also works everywhere. It's time someone did something about it with a whole new system. Calls that are not pre-whitelisted should be blocked and logged. Then at the end of the day, you should get an email summarizing all the blocked calls so you can whitelist the ones you want.

https://www.truecaller.com/ does this to a certain extent. Users flag phone numbers / caller IDs as spam, giving you the discretion to block, whitelist, or subscribe to lists to autoblock common spam callers similar to adblock plug-ins.

Re: Amazon Echo Show

#403

Post by rdrey »

dmix wrote: post #297
cbhl wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They actually already have that. The Fire TV Stick has "Alexa" in it, but you have to use the push-to-talk remote instead of having an always-on mic as in the Echo.

Won't be long until TV's are internet connected microphones too.

You mean like this very real hack? https://www.theverge.com/2017/4/25/15421326/smart-tv-hacking...

Re: Amazon Echo Show

#404

Post by jstandard »

FullMtlAlcoholc wrote: post #301
ribs wrote: post #236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's all still quite new, and the drive to compete and gain market share keeps them separate, as it does in all industries. There will be consolidation in time. For now, it's a mixed blessing, but mostly a blessing.

> For now, it's a mixed blessing, but mostly a blessing. In what way? You can accomplish all these things for free with your existing phone, Google Assistant, IFTTT, and very little effort. If you do it this way, your virtual assistant won't be as dumb as rocks either. Sorry, but Alexa is still riding on the short bus.

Alexa is positioned differently. There are typically configurable DIY solutions to most broad appeal consumer products. Many just want something that works out of the box, with minimal configuration or learning required.

Re: Amazon Echo Show

#405

Post by jameshart »

Nullabillity wrote: post #64
iplaw wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There isn't a need; it's more of a want. I have a few Echos and use them to control my whole home audio system. "Alexa, play Kendrick Lamar on Spotify." Just like that, I have music throughout the house and in the front and back yards. You can also get more specific with commands in order to limit where the music plays, what music service is polled, etc. It is much easier than pulling out a device, navigating to the…

Presumably you only listen to chart-topping american pop and music made by people with common english names? Because so far I've never had any luck whatsoever with anything else.

I don't know what you have in mind, but I was pretty impressed that when I asked Alexa to play 'Scherzo for X-Wings' she pulled up the right track from the Force Awakens soundtrack without a problem. Try it before you knock it.

Re: Amazon Echo Show

#406

Post by nebabyte »

criddell wrote: post #265
verytrivial wrote: post #63

I must be one of those old farts who prefers privacy over convenience. I do not want what amounts to an always-on black-box surveillance device in my home and I simply do not understand why other people think it is okay. I honestly don't. Down with this sort of thing!

If the expected utility of the device exceeds the likely set of problems that come with it, people might choose to buy one. Clearly you've done this calculation but come up with a different answer. Assuming there is some utility there, it must be the surveillance aspect that is the problem. If you got an Echo, what harm do you think you would likely experience?

I can see almost no situation in which the benefits of having a plugged in camera or mic I do not know isn't always on outweigh the costs, even if the cost is "just" mental complacence with surveillance.

If I need peace of mind away from home, I can simply plug in a webcam or connect the otherwise-airgapped security system to the network while I'm away. If I want a hands-free mic, I can buy one with a power switch and connect it to whatever setup I need it for.

If amazon releases hardware that makes it verifiably possible to have such setups, more power to them I suppose. But as likely they won't, as they prefer "all-in-one" solutions that give them "last-mile level" control over how their devices get used, I will probably never buy such devices from them.

Re: Amazon Echo Show

#407

Post by extrapickles »

thinkling wrote: post #356
mholmes680 wrote: post #330

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Awesome. Now, one more thing: Echo Car. I dunno why, i just want Alexa in my car. She's already in 4 rooms in my house (no wait, 5 including Fire Stick? 7 including the Kindles?), and in my pocket.

A bit off-topic, but: is Amazon the only company with substantial machine learning talent that doesn't seem to be working on a self-driving car? Are the people who would be doing that busy developing Amazon's drones?

I would think so. Self driving cars don't align well with what they are trying to do and everyone and their dog is working in that space, so margins will be slim.

Drones let them ship things much faster to customers for cheaper than existing techniques and its easy to see how that helps their business. Margins of existing players in this space are typically much higher, which is something Amazon likes to go after (just look at pre-AWS hosting costs).

Re: Amazon Echo Show

#408

Post by conradev »

pgroves wrote: post #370
mikeash wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are we ever going to see unity between these services, or are we doomed to have little walled-off fiefdoms forever? A phone number works anywhere in the world, to anywhere in the world, with anyone who has a phone. All e-mail providers work with each other. I don't care who you're with, and I wouldn't even have to know except it's usually part of the address. SMS works no matter which provider we both have. It feels…

More optimistically, it could be a step toward solving the problem if it adopted a Roku-like model where all those apps are installed and logged in at all times and you can pick one from a standardized menu. On Roku you can go to Netflix, Hulu, and single-channel apps like A&E. Bonus points if there is a standard way to 'get a call' or 'search for a contact' that cuts across the video conf apps.

iOS 10 supports this with CallKit. The "Call" action in the Phone UI can call through Skype, Messenger, WhatsApp, FaceTime, etc. and receiving a call looks like the native phone UI.

Re: Amazon Echo Show

#409

Post by conradev »

haikuginger wrote: post #285
mikeash wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Video calling and instant messaging have both been around for ages at this point, and remain stubbornly walled off. Both should qualify as "basics" by now. Sure, you can still SMS worldwide, as long as they have a cell phone. But non-phone devices are becoming very common. What if you want to send or receive messages on your tablet or computer. (This works OK in the Apple world, but only because they hack it by routi…

> This works OK in the Apple world, but only because they hack it by routing SMS through your phone. Actually, not necessarily. At least with my provider (AT&T), I can set up my Mac as a validated device for WiFi calling, so I can do SMS and actual phone calls without using the iPhone as a relay.

Yes, for those looking for more details, AT&T calls it NumberSync: https://www.att.com/shop/wireless/features/numbersync.html

Re: Amazon Echo Show

#410

Post by [deleted] »

a2decrow wrote: post #379
criddell wrote: post #340

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is your internet metered? I'm trying to find what people think is the likely harm to come from Amazon having a microphone in their home.

There are still a few sane people left that won't deliberately plant a surveillance device in their homes.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN