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

Xfinity using WiFi signals in your house to detect motion

xfinity.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

441–450 of 517 posts

Re: Xfinity using WiFi signals in your house to detect motion

#441

Post by 0cf8612b2e1e »

barnas2 wrote: post #424
wil421 wrote: post #385

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I guess you don’t want the fastest speed or no data cap. We easily surpass the 1TB cap with 4K streaming and WFH video calls.

I use Cox and get their fastest speed (2.5Gbps) with the option for unlimited data if I wanted it, and I'm using my own equipment.

Similarly, never seen limitations on speed or allotment if using owned equipment. The ISP will give a big scary message about how support will be unable to help you if things go wrong, but that’s the extent of it.

Re: Xfinity using WiFi signals in your house to detect motion

#442

Post by citizenpaul »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #362
citizenpaul wrote: post #321

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or the people elected by other humans could... IDK do their job of representing the people rather than a handful of corporations. The problem is what I said in other comnents here. This is the fabel of sodom and gomorrah in action. We have no people with any moral compass in charge.

> do their job of representing the people rather than a handful of corporations There is no incentive to represent the civically disengaged. Particularly on niche issues like privacy. > We have no people with any moral compass in charge No system works if reliant on wishing up on a star that people were better. We have a lot of problems with our republic's design. None of them can address problems people don't care t…

>no incentive to represent the civically disengaged

THATS LITERALLY THE JOB.

You are literally arguing that if I got a job at a bank and started stealing the deposits it would be ok because I had no incentive not to.

Actually now that I think about it you are also reinforcing my point. Sodom and Gomorrah. You yourself have such poor moral compass that when another person acts maliciously you give them a pass because of course that's what they would do. Because its also what you would do because you also have no moral compass.

The city could not be saved. Not because "god" destroyed it but because the people themselves destroyed it. No good people existed there.

Re: Xfinity using WiFi signals in your house to detect motion

#443

Post by dcow »

ndriscoll wrote: post #413
dcow wrote: post #300

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It would be nice if you could argue, “well, just be a good site and don’t use marketing cookies”, but the ePrivacy Directive requires consent for performance and preference cookies too. Perhaps a liberal reading arguably allows classification of certain statistics and preferences functions to be strictly necessary, like “I wouldn’t provide this service without crash reporting because I’d go insane so it’s strictly ne…

Yes that's the point. You don't need those things. The idea that a news article or blog post or e-commerce page could "crash" is ridiculous, and the law shouldn't humor that excuse. There's been standard ways to declaratively define such pages since before scripting frameworks gained popularity. Use those standard ways. If you're really building an app and need to performance test, buy some hardware in your target ra…

You don’t need a shopping cart either. Just make the user write down the skus from your online catalog and send you a purchase order. Products exist on spectrum and the ones that win are typically easier and more convenient to use. If your business is developing the best product it can, it absolutely needs the ability to be convenient and useful.

Adding a language select option on a multinational site seems pretty table stakes in my experience. Plenty often the user does not wish to use the same language as their system/browser. Switching your system’s default language just for one site is a huge hassle.

Re crash reporting: I’m talking about tools like Sentry. I have never once worked on a product of any scale that didn’t need to collect diagnostic reports from the field in order to address code level errors that happen as users are using the product. In house or 3rd party it doesn't matter, and client state has always been involved. A product that doesn’t function is broken. It needs to be fixed.

There is no privacy concession in any of these cases. The EPD simply over-regulates cookies.

I mean maybe we should just reimplement all this crap using indexdb. That’s not a cookie, legally.

The EPD fights symptoms not causes and the internet is worse for it.

Re: Xfinity using WiFi signals in your house to detect motion

#444

Post by stronglikedan »

Terr_ wrote: post #188
cs702 wrote: post #150

If you ask the Xfinity managers who came up with this idea whether thieves will be able to buy live information on whether your home is empty from hackers on the dark web, the managers will likely say... nothing. What they will do is look at you with a deer-in-the-headlights expression in their shocked faces. Sigh.

The word "liability" might not always work, but occasionally it makes someone think a little harder about what their company is doing.

A company like Comcast knows more about the liabilities of what they're doing than any of their customers do, guaranteed.

Re: Xfinity using WiFi signals in your house to detect motion

#445

Post by sneak »

kstrauser wrote: post #429
sneak wrote: post #311

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The ER I was seen at a few weeks ago had me sign a consent to use my data to (presumably) train AI.

Was it possible to deny it?

Probably, but my care would have suffered. They are required by law to treat people in emergencies but they aren’t required by law to do anything but keep them from immediately dying.

I have a condition that requires complex and ongoing care, and sometimes need to be admitted briefly for same. Refusing to sign consent forms prevents that and gets you on to the “this guy isn’t going to pay us, get him out of here asap” list.

Re: Xfinity using WiFi signals in your house to detect motion

#446

Post by JumpCrisscross »

citizenpaul wrote: post #442
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #362

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> do their job of representing the people rather than a handful of corporations There is no incentive to represent the civically disengaged. Particularly on niche issues like privacy. > We have no people with any moral compass in charge No system works if reliant on wishing up on a star that people were better. We have a lot of problems with our republic's design. None of them can address problems people don't care t…

>no incentive to represent the civically disengaged THATS LITERALLY THE JOB. You are literally arguing that if I got a job at a bank and started stealing the deposits it would be ok because I had no incentive not to. Actually now that I think about it you are also reinforcing my point. Sodom and Gomorrah. You yourself have such poor moral compass that when another person acts maliciously you give them a pass because…

> THATS LITERALLY THE JOB

No, it’s not and it never has been. (Civic engagement and persistent watchfulness on liberties is a universal drumbeat across democracies.)

The courts et al are tasked with protecting the minority from the tyranny of the majority, or in this case, the engaged. Making the judiciary coëqual was our founders’ attempt at taming this tendency. But nothing knowledgeable ever written has suggested our republic should run on autopilot.

> when another person acts maliciously you give them a pass

I’m not giving them a pass, I’m saying the system is acting as designed. If people don’t give a shit about privacy but give a LOT of shits about abortion and cost of living, the elected should focus on the latter. This isn’t moral corruption, it’s responding to expressed preference. (Also, Comcast using Wi-fi to aid law enforcement is far from a black-and-white moral issue. It’s a political and legal question with multiple equilibria when it comes to right answers.)

There is being righteous and there is being right. The bulk of advocates for digital privacy enjoy the former and almost take their failure at the latter as further evidence of their righteousness. (It’s a lot easier to wax lyrical about Sodom and Gomorrah than pick up the phone once a month and attend meetings.)

Re: Xfinity using WiFi signals in your house to detect motion

#447

Post by JumpCrisscross »

close04 wrote: post #370
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #362

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> do their job of representing the people rather than a handful of corporations There is no incentive to represent the civically disengaged. Particularly on niche issues like privacy. > We have no people with any moral compass in charge No system works if reliant on wishing up on a star that people were better. We have a lot of problems with our republic's design. None of them can address problems people don't care t…

> There is no incentive to represent the civically disengaged You're repeatedly misrepresenting or misunderstanding the issue. The tl'dr is that Bezos' civic engagement weighs more than my civic engagement, more than a million of me even. This is one easy way to take the casual and overly general "you're civically disengaged" victim blaming off the table. Your elected representatives already know your interests, they…

> Bezos' civic engagement weighs more than my civic engagement

Again, I worked on these issues. Bezos and friends never showed up. Nobody showed up. This wasn’t a battle between David and Goliath, it was an empty field to which some generals showed up, looked around and then left.

> money is a superpower so the more one has, the more one can take

To a limit. The last few years have been a barn full of monied candidates being trounced by insurgents.

And again, in any case, not germane to this issue. Most people who would call in on digital privacy don’t bother because they’re lazy or think it’s useless. When they do, e.g. when the EFF mobilises, it’s a quick battle. (The problem being such mobilisation has tended to be reactionary. In part due to the other overlap between digital privacy advocates who will civically engage and libertarians. So we don’t get positive pressure to pass protections, just occasional negative pressure against legal encroachment.)

Re: Xfinity using WiFi signals in your house to detect motion

#448

Post by SoftTalker »

0cf8612b2e1e wrote: post #305
SoftTalker wrote: post #237

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You also get better rates if you use their equipment.

Surely that is not true? I thought rental fees were common with using the vendor equipment (something like $10/month). It is a frequently listed as a cost cutting measure to buy your own modem rather than rent from The ISP. A modem is $100-200, so you should be net positive after a year on the investment.

No longer true last time I went in to renegotiate my service plan, I got a better monthly rate and higher bandwidth using their gear. I had previously used my own modem and router.

Re: Xfinity using WiFi signals in your house to detect motion

#449

Post by citizenpaul »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #446
citizenpaul wrote: post #442

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>no incentive to represent the civically disengaged THATS LITERALLY THE JOB. You are literally arguing that if I got a job at a bank and started stealing the deposits it would be ok because I had no incentive not to. Actually now that I think about it you are also reinforcing my point. Sodom and Gomorrah. You yourself have such poor moral compass that when another person acts maliciously you give them a pass because…

> THATS LITERALLY THE JOB No, it’s not and it never has been. (Civic engagement and persistent watchfulness on liberties is a universal drumbeat across democracies.) The courts et al are tasked with protecting the minority from the tyranny of the majority, or in this case, the engaged. Making the judiciary coëqual was our founders’ attempt at taming this tendency. But nothing knowledgeable ever written has suggested…

Yeah the job of being and elected official is to ignore the population and seize power/money/influence for yourself....

You really are proving my original point though.

>(It’s a lot easier to wax lyrical about Sodom and Gomorrah than pick up the phone once a month and attend meetings.)

Blame that victim!

Re: Xfinity using WiFi signals in your house to detect motion

#450

Post by reverendsteveii »

lloeki wrote: post #318
dcow wrote: post #220

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We suffer from a problem that engineers want nothing to do with politics. I 1000% agree we need a digital bill of rights. It pains me every time a “well behaved” website pops up a cookie consent banner for the billionth time after I already consented because the browser wiped all the persistent user identifiers available to it. For my protection -_- I want privacy codified in human law. I didn't vote for standards bo…

> I want privacy codified in human law Article 12 No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to attacks upon his honour and reputation. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks - Paris, 1948, Universal Declaration of Human Rights

if there are no consequences to violating a law is it a law?
Post reply on HN