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

NH judge orders Amazon to give Echo recordings in murder case

wmur.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 185 posts

Re: NH judge orders Amazon to give Echo recordings in murder case

#81

Post by tjoff »

nolok wrote: post #41
danso wrote: post #6

I know that this article itself doesn’t have much content but I’m interested in what the police are actually requesting, and what they end up getting. Do they assume/suspect that Echo/Amazon continuously records and logs audio, akin to a security camera? Or do they have evidence that Echo was actually activated around the time of the murders, or afterwards by the suspect himself? I was also interested in this quote:…

I sincerely doubt people don't realise that anything after the trigger is sent home, since a "feature" of alexa is that the app let you see each request you made, how alexa answered, and let them know if she got it wrong. I think it's more a case of "don't care" / "don't realize the risks"

I'd think the absolute vast majority would not have spent any time wondering about that the slightest. And most that do would just assume that the app asked alexa and retrieved a local log.

So much of what is collected today completely hinges on the fact that the public doesn't even grasp the feasibility nor the desirability of keeping track of them.

Re: NH judge orders Amazon to give Echo recordings in murder case

#82

Post by peteretep »

visarga wrote: post #57
peteretep wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> How do the particulars of this case [etc] > It smacks of “think of the children!” Your original comment of "against the homeowner" reads to me as a similar appeal to emotion. > The accessibility/retention of the recordings for law enforcement The particulars here seem to be that they probably don't have recordings, and those recordings -- if they exist -- were only obtainable under court supervision. You muddled --…

No, I think the grandparent post was arguing about slowly eroding privacy. If they set a precedent, they could abuse it later.

I think we can all get behind privacy as a right. Making bad arguments for it doesn't help anyone though.

Re: NH judge orders Amazon to give Echo recordings in murder case

#83

Post by pritambaral »

citrablue wrote: post #61
gammateam wrote: post #51

My company responds to subpoenas with a wiki article on how client side encryption works

This is a glib and unhelpful response. Does your company potentially have access to data that may be useful in a legal investigation? Do you provide server side voice recognition services as accurate as Alexa/Google? My company would respond to a similar subpoena by explaining that we make archery bows from wood. That also doesn't add anything to the HN discussion.

> My company would respond to a similar subpoena by explaining that we make archery bows from wood. That also doesn't add anything to the HN discussion.

I believe your parent's comment is relevant to this HN discussion, quite unlike your company's occupation. Your parent's comment suggests their company's users upload data (albeit encrypted client-side) to the company, so a judge could — without an understanding of client-side encryption — reasonably subpoena the company for user data. Compared to that, it is quite unlikely a judge would mistake a company that makes wooden archery bows for a company that collects much user data, or believe that the former fact has much to do with the latter supposition.

Re: NH judge orders Amazon to give Echo recordings in murder case

#84

Post by gambiting »

dunpeal wrote: post #26
PascLeRasc wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

iFixit reports that it has 4GB of storage onboard [1]. That's room for 97 hours of mp3 96kbps audio [2], and if we're going full conspiracy they could have put an entirely different flash chip in there with the wrong markings. [1] https://www.ifixit.com/Teardown/Amazon+Echo+Dot+Teardown/613... [2] https://soundandpicture.com/2011/06/audio-memory-cards-how-m...

It would be super sketchy if it records any audio, since there's no real reason or need to do that for the features it provides. Also, if we're going conspiracy mode: we're all surrounded by devices with very good microphones that are always on, primarily our phones.

There's a very simple reason why phones cannot be recording all the time - it would have an impact on the battery life. But an always plugged in device like the echo does not have such limitation.

Re: NH judge orders Amazon to give Echo recordings in murder case

#85

Post by ThePhysicist »

Kiro wrote: post #72
aleksei wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What is it that users don’t realize? You answered yourself in an exemplary fashion, but I'll state it explicitly (and simply). People don't think about it. I'd like to imagine anyone who realises the implications of owning such a device would refuse to own one, although I know I'm mistaken. I don't mean that people should know better (although ofc they should), but new technology is all too easily likened to any ho…

You are mistaken. The utility of Alexa/Google Home is worth any privacy intrusion for me. I simply don't care. Convince me otherwise.

That’s interesting. Can you elaborate a bit? Are you not worried because you think the information is not sensitive or do you think the risk of it being abused, lost or stolen is negligible? I’m really curious to know (and while I have a different opinion I think yours is legitimate as well).

Re: NH judge orders Amazon to give Echo recordings in murder case

#86

Post by pbhjpbhj »

nolok wrote: post #41
danso wrote: post #6

I know that this article itself doesn’t have much content but I’m interested in what the police are actually requesting, and what they end up getting. Do they assume/suspect that Echo/Amazon continuously records and logs audio, akin to a security camera? Or do they have evidence that Echo was actually activated around the time of the murders, or afterwards by the suspect himself? I was also interested in this quote:…

I sincerely doubt people don't realise that anything after the trigger is sent home, since a "feature" of alexa is that the app let you see each request you made, how alexa answered, and let them know if she got it wrong. I think it's more a case of "don't care" / "don't realize the risks"

People perhaps assume all audio is processed locally and/or isn't stored except ephemerally.

I'd imagine there's a default "we store your data for AI training purposes" that would allow them to keep all audio.

Re: NH judge orders Amazon to give Echo recordings in murder case

#87

Post by Kiro »

raarts wrote: post #78
Kiro wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are mistaken. The utility of Alexa/Google Home is worth any privacy intrusion for me. I simply don't care. Convince me otherwise.

https://jacquesmattheij.com/if-you-have-nothing-to-hide/

Yes, I agree but for me personally I don't care even if that dystopia happened. It's still worth it for me, again, personally. I'm against mass-surveillance because then it affects everyone, whether you agree on it or not but in this case I'm actively buying this thing and expose myself to it.

Re: NH judge orders Amazon to give Echo recordings in murder case

#88

Post by Kiro »

ThePhysicist wrote: post #85
Kiro wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are mistaken. The utility of Alexa/Google Home is worth any privacy intrusion for me. I simply don't care. Convince me otherwise.

That’s interesting. Can you elaborate a bit? Are you not worried because you think the information is not sensitive or do you think the risk of it being abused, lost or stolen is negligible? I’m really curious to know (and while I have a different opinion I think yours is legitimate as well).

All of the above. I don't think it's sensitive and I think the risk is negligible but even if it happened I still think it's worth it. Like I said in my sibling comment I'm against mass-surveillance in general because then you have no choice but here I'm actively deciding to expose myself because I find the utility worth it.

Re: NH judge orders Amazon to give Echo recordings in murder case

#89

Post by ryanlol »

danso wrote: post #6

I know that this article itself doesn’t have much content but I’m interested in what the police are actually requesting, and what they end up getting. Do they assume/suspect that Echo/Amazon continuously records and logs audio, akin to a security camera? Or do they have evidence that Echo was actually activated around the time of the murders, or afterwards by the suspect himself? I was also interested in this quote:…

>Echo is doing far more surreptitious surveillance and analysis, i.e. not just listening for the trigger word

This should be trivial to prove.

Post reply on HN