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

Amazon Echo

amazon.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

691–700 of 746 posts

Re: Amazon Echo

#691

Post by eric_bullington »

anigbrowl wrote: post #368
hackuser wrote: post #275

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Most people don't care because they're not culpable enough to feel paranoid. Maybe you didn't mean it literally but it's a popular expression in this context. I don't think a desire for privacy is paranoid; it is normal, healthy behavior. But to address the gist of what you say, I think you assume an understanding of data security that is far beyond most end users. How many even know what "metadata" means, or how '…

I'm not saying a desire for privacy is paranoid, but the assumption that the government will engage in passive monitoring and archival of everything that can be captured through the microphone and use it as leverage later, even if it doesn't involve criminal liability, eg 'assist us without nefarious purpose or we will use something we recorded to cause you acute embarrassment with devastating social consequences.' I…

>But unless you have a fundamentally antagonist view of government (which most people in the US don't)

Speaking of empiricism, there's abundant evidence that your statement is incorrect:

http://www.pewresearch.org/key-data-points/views-of-governme... (and this one was before Snowden!) http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/politics/item/18188-pol...

Re: Amazon Echo

#692

Post by PavlovsCat »

rkangel wrote: post #289
chatmasta wrote: post #87

This "internet-of-things" trend coincides unfortunately with the "dragnet surveillance" trend. With every new product launch from a "cloud company," I increasingly feel as if I'm reading the tombstone of modern society. The selling point behind these devices is convenience, but at the cost of security. I don't think I need to explain to HN why an always-on, internet connected voice recording device is something to ke…

> Yes, transmission is triggered on-chip, but who verifies every chip fabrication is performed using the same imprints? You think governments don't have factory floor managers in their pockets? If you're willing to accept changed chip silicon as a possible attack vector, then you need to start worrying about a rather large set of devices. Your laptop is internet connected and has a microphone. So is your phone. Your…

Fine, but just because someone could bulldoze my house doesn't mean I don't lock the door. Just because I could have a heart attack doesn't mean I don't use condoms. And so on.

> you don't need to worry unless you're an international terrorist.

Or a person with a conscience who could be threat to people in power without one. For some reason I doubt that, say, people involved in extra-judicial killings, are really worried about being caught. At least one of them is known by name and proud holder of a peace nobel prize. So I'd say if you are a heavyweight criminal already on the payroll, you have nothing to fear period. Small fish and decent people, on the other hand, well. Do you think people like Poitras or Appelbaum don't get snooped on? Would you call them international terrorists? All sorts of activist groups get monitored, and no, it's not because they're all terrorists in spe. You may believe that, I don't buy it for one second.

> Your laptop is internet connected and has a microphone. So is your phone. Your TV is probably internet connected, and if you're fiddling with the production line, why not add a tiny microphone? I could go on.

Don't have a laptop, if I did, killing the crappy microphone in it would be trivial and not a big loss since when I use a mic, it's one I connect manually. Don't have a smartphone, though I doubt that matters; but my phone doesn't have 7 microphones in it, and I doubt you could record anything useful with it while I have it in my pocket. Last time I had a TV was in the 90s. So maybe actually do go on?

And even if none of that was true, I don't see how it constitutes an argument; as I said, it's a bit like saying I shouldn't worry about the poison I just ate because I also have cancer. How about I worry about, and try to undo, both? I don't care about chance of success either, I can still get washed downstream when I am a dead fish, there will always be infinite time for that.

Re: Amazon Echo

#693

Post by Cthulhu_ »

harvestmoon wrote: post #569
calebm wrote: post #560

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I really thought it was satire too. It wasn't until there was like 10 seconds left in the video that I realized, "there's not enough time left to make it funny, it must be serious!"

Agree. This really seems like it could be the start of a futuristic, dystopian horror movie. I think what makes it even more unsettling is that the people's voices are recorded naturally (the microphone several feet away) while the device sounds like it is coming from your computer directly. Not to mention these people are in bed together while this HAL-like robotic cylinder is listening to everything they are doing…

nf nf nf nf "What are you doing, Dave?"

Re: Amazon Echo

#694

Post by Tepix »

Amazon Echo reminds me that I'd really like a physical on/off switch for the microphone[] on my next mobile phone. I doubt that there will be one available that has such a switch, however. -- [] Switches for the camera, GPS, WiFi, Bluetooth and GSM would also be great

Re: Amazon Echo

#695

Post by kmfrk »

CamperBob2 wrote: post #557
jwallaceparker wrote: post #343

Watch the promo video again and pretend it's the first few minutes of a horror movie. A package arrives on the front porch. The family brings it in and opens it. It's Alexa. It's "for everyone," says Father. The next few days are blissful. Alexa integrates herself into the family. She is indispensable. How did they ever get by without her? Father rushes in from the backyard, "Alexa, how tall is Mt. Everest?" Alexa an…

"Is it on?" "It's always on. ... It uses far-field technology, so it can hear you from anywhere in the room." Jeez, whoever wrote this is missing their calling. They should have their people get together with Wes Craven's people and do lunch, or something. (Edit: OK, the producers clearly knew they what they were doing, even if the people paying them didn't. Check out the daughter's sweater at 2:52.)

“The ping is coming from inside the house.”

Re: Amazon Echo

#696

Post by q4 »

jberryman wrote: post #575
jwallaceparker wrote: post #343

Watch the promo video again and pretend it's the first few minutes of a horror movie. A package arrives on the front porch. The family brings it in and opens it. It's Alexa. It's "for everyone," says Father. The next few days are blissful. Alexa integrates herself into the family. She is indispensable. How did they ever get by without her? Father rushes in from the backyard, "Alexa, how tall is Mt. Everest?" Alexa an…

Enjoy: http://youtubedoubler.com/dOPY

Nice!

Re: Amazon Echo

#697

Post by Tyrannosaurs »

mamikonyana wrote: post #519
flanbiscuit wrote: post #347

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> - it can answer questions at the dinner table... that would be my biggest use for it, well that and as a speaker I guess. I really hope that I can swap out "Alexa" for the word "Computer" so I could feel like I'm one step closer to Star Trek

from the video: "..it only hears you when you use the wake word we chose..", so you can definitely chose "Computer" as your wake word

Isn't this patently false?

If it's not listening how can it hear the wake word?

Re: Amazon Echo

#698

Post by Tyrannosaurs »

bryanlarsen wrote: post #478
atmosx wrote: post #443

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I do have control over my laptop, the NSA or Amazon would have to actively hack me in order go get to that mic and luckily I'm not worth it anyways. In order for someone (the NSA?) to track a phone and do whatever they need to do, they need to have a warrant and what-not. That's like deliberately sending all your living-room conversations (yours and your family's) online for analysis for God-knows-what purpose. You t…

There are two basic ways for the NSA to snoop on you using this device. 1. Listen to the internet traffic 2. Install malware to listen to everything For #1, the Echo only sends conversations preceded by it's keyword. But since the alternatives to the commands you're telling Echo involve the internet anyways, what's the difference? IOW, asking echo for the weather sends the same basic information to the NSA that pulli…

Doing 2 on a smartphone feels like it would be something which would start draining battery really quick which would be a giveaway.

With this it's running on mains, it could upload in the middle of the night when it would probably be undetected

Plus, why do one or the other? Sure you want to get someone's phone but why not another device too?

Re: Amazon Echo

#700

Post by unclebucknasty »

drodgers wrote: post #685
unclebucknasty wrote: post #632

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I sincerely wonder about the effect of offloading so much of our "brainwork" to computers. No one remembers phone numbers or tries to navigate without GPS, and increasingly we depend on accesss to information so there's less practice with storage and recall. What brain/neuron plasticity tells us is that our brains literally reallocate unused neurons for other tasks. So, on the one hand, a positive theory might have i…

This is an old argument, it was made about writing, printing etc. The missing step is that these changes are actually optimisations because information really has become easier to access. If we were about to get transported to a pre-internet civilisation, then we would have cause to worry, but since we strongly expect to have access to computers and the internet for the rest of our lives, it is actually more efficien…

>This is an old argument, it was made about writing, printing etc

One difference is that technology is replacing more and more of what we one might consider "mundane", but really involves higher order thinking that is important for creativity, critical-thinking, problem-solving, etc. For instance, the ability to draw from a broad swath of stored, assimilated, and well-understood information is a critical element of problem-solving and finding creative solutions.

Because functional intelligence to a large degree involves drawing on information and experiences to assemble solutions. This requires a "working set" from which to draw. It is not enough to simply look things up, because you don't know what to look up.

And, in general, what computers do for us that, say, simply printing or other older "technology" didn't supplant includes executive functioning (e.g. algorithmic tasks like mapping directions, etc.) Beyond simple information retrieval, computers actually solve problems for us. In fact, it's so different from something like printing that I am not sure I understand your analogy.

>we're better at using information because we have much more access to it now

Sounds intuitive, but I am not sure we have evidence for this. Ironically, though, computers are better at using information.

>it is actually more efficient to spend our time learning other things

I mentioned that this could be one theoretical upshot but, in general, I think our culture is going in the opposite direction with a tendency towards mindless distraction. Exclude tech people and reconsider your statement.

Post reply on HN