451–460 of 734 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That doesn't work in a toilet stall.
Our company has this in the toilets, when it goes dark you just wave your hands
Thank goodness for phone flashlights!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you replace "fuzzy human speech-command detection" with "buttons which can accidentally be pressed" - how is this different from butt-dialing?
Most phone now have some kind of lock screen, which makes it pretty difficult to get to the butt dialing stage. Will speech command recognition get to that stage? The main reason I won't have any of those products in my house is because of that. I'd much rather have a confirmation of some kind before the system takes action. "...random talking..." Assistant "I am recording" Me: "Stop recording"
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> "I felt invaded," she said. "A total privacy invasion. Immediately I said, 'I'm never plugging that device in again, because I can't trust it.'" Let this lady's reaction be a lesson to all of those who say "people don't care about privacy." She wired her home with Alexa devices, and yet when she found out how her privacy could practically be invaded through such devices, she seems like couldn't get rid of them fast…
> This is why governments must intervene with laws such as GDPR or even much stronger ones in the future to protect people's privacy, because the companies themselves have no incentive to "self-regulate" other than a negligible amount. Market failure does not imply government solution. You're going to need a much stronger argument than "companies aren't doing a good enough job." Amazon invaded her privacy, she realiz…
Case and point - 2008 Market Crash, everyone agrees the dishonest practices that led to the crash should have been made absolutely illegal (in the cases where they already weren't)
In this case, we have MANY significant and potentially extraordinarily damaging failures in the markets to effectively protect people's privacy occurring fairly regularly. GDPR is not the ideal solution my any metric, but that's a failure of government to create effective legislation - not a lack of need for effective rules.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you replace "fuzzy human speech-command detection" with "buttons which can accidentally be pressed" - how is this different from butt-dialing?
I can't pick up my coworker's phone and manually dial a number, because years of learning from our mistakes have led us to implement lock screens and such. I can, however, say "Hey Siri, call 867-5309." Or "Hey Siri, Facebook status: my anus is bleeding. SEND!" Because we are apparently incapable of applying past lessons to new technologies.
My point is they're really half-assed products right now that are behaving badly/immaturely.
It's absurd to me that someone would wire up "every room in their house" with internet connected microphones (in a technology that is still in it's infancy!) and then claim you felt like your privacy was "invaded". At best, it's a Trojan Horse, but the naivety here is astounding. Of course your Echo shouldn't send out private conversations, and it looks like a legitimate bug occurred. But man, the buy-now think-later…
You literally carry an audio & video recording device with a GPS chip and multiple wireless attack vectors on you for nearly every waking hour of your life.
I'm not surprised that my GPS capable phone knows where I am at all times. I wouldn't be surprised if my Echo recorded my voice and sent a message to someone. I wouldn't be surprised if there were some major bugs yet to be addressed in the software for the Echo. I guess this is a little harsh, but my sympathies are somewhat lost on these people. Not their fault for what happened, but they did take a risk.
"A husband and wife in the privacy of their home have conversations that they're not expecting to be sent to someone (in) their address book,"
It just doesn't sit well with me.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don’t think my phone is listening, other than the wake word. Same deal with my smart speakers. I think either one could , if hacked or just updated by the manufacturer with nefarious intent. I see no difference, privacy-wise, between the two. I don’t care how they’re advertised, I care what they’re capable of.
That wake word can be disabled in your phone and it's perfectly functional without it. This way, it only listens when you want it to (theoretically). I'm sure you can appreciate the difference: press a button to talk to Siri vs Siri is always listening. The latter seems crazy to me, on a phone, cylinder, laptop or whatever device it's implemented.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I remember the first voice command stuff on google. Buddy of mine was trying it out and I couldn't help myself but shout: "NEW TEXT MESSAGE TO JENNY! FUCK YOU! SEND!" Fortunately the phone was too slow to take it all (even if it had Jenny would have found it amusing, she was a cube or two away). But yeah first thing I thought of was that if it's listening how easy is it for it to mistake intent or someone else or etc…
Ok Google has been a massive disappointment every time I've tried to use it. I tried "next song" while in Google Maps and it marked Exxon along the route. Then it played a song in a streaming app by "Max," wasting my data and making me close the streaming app I didn't even know I had and restart the music I wanted. "Next" turned out to work a bit better but it took multiple tries.
though i can easily see with background noise, next song sounding like exxon. I think due to frustrations with siri, i talk to google in very clearly enunciated words and havent had any interesting failures yet.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you replace "fuzzy human speech-command detection" with "buttons which can accidentally be pressed" - how is this different from butt-dialing?
Most phone now have some kind of lock screen, which makes it pretty difficult to get to the butt dialing stage. Will speech command recognition get to that stage? The main reason I won't have any of those products in my house is because of that. I'd much rather have a confirmation of some kind before the system takes action. "...random talking..." Assistant "I am recording" Me: "Stop recording"
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you replace "fuzzy human speech-command detection" with "buttons which can accidentally be pressed" - how is this different from butt-dialing?
Most phone now have some kind of lock screen, which makes it pretty difficult to get to the butt dialing stage. Will speech command recognition get to that stage? The main reason I won't have any of those products in my house is because of that. I'd much rather have a confirmation of some kind before the system takes action. "...random talking..." Assistant "I am recording" Me: "Stop recording"
This sort of thing makes me nostalgic for the old days of explicit "Save" commands in every application.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> "I felt invaded," she said. "A total privacy invasion. Immediately I said, 'I'm never plugging that device in again, because I can't trust it.'" Let this lady's reaction be a lesson to all of those who say "people don't care about privacy." She wired her home with Alexa devices, and yet when she found out how her privacy could practically be invaded through such devices, she seems like couldn't get rid of them fast…
> People care deeply about their privacy. No, they don't. Do you really think if, before she made this purchase, someone explained to her all the things that could theoratically go wrong with this device, she would have chosen not to buy it? She only cares now and acts like she doesn't share quite a bit of the blame because it actually affected her. I think it is highly likely she'll just switch to an Apple or Google…