Hacker News Reader

Comment by A4ET8a8uTh0 | Hacker News Reader

It is absolutely not unexpected. Any vestiges of privacy are being eroded. Not that recently, inside of the car was relatively safe from eavesdropping. Cell phones and Alexa devices changed all that.

What I do find odd, however, is the weird distribution of those devices. In my immediate social circle, its either old people who want to show they have something cool and hip and young tech enthusiasts. My sample may be completele skewed as I am not the most social person ever though. The trend may be much more pronounced.

Still, it boggles my mind. Why would you voluntarily do it? My parents only invited trusted friends to ensure nothing 'questionable' made it to the authorities ( former soviet republic ). People today brazenly broadcast it.

I honestly do not get it.

View on HN

If I become bedridden, I will welcome a smart speaker. Until then, nope. Even if it wasn't about privacy issues, being too lazy to get up and turn a knob is terrible for one's health.

I've also considered one for my shop, so if I get pinned under the car or something I can yell for 911. But I'd only turn it on if I was about to do something dangerous. I might also get one if I decide I'm at risk for "I've fallen and I can't get up". (That happened to a relative, it took her 2 days to inch across the floor to get to the phone.)

Just FYI, there are devices specifically designed for this. It's basically a phone you hang around your neck, and it detects falls and uses an audio prompt (calling 911 on your behalf if you don't respond in 60 seconds, or something). My grandmother uses one since she's had a lot of falls.

Good to know, thanks.

>Good to know, thanks.

And it's not new either. I remember these TV ads[0] from when I was a teenager (1980s) and my peer group and I found them quite amusing.

These days, the same folks take a more threatening tack[1] (a sign of the times, perhaps?), which I find pretty galling.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I've_fallen,_and_I_can't_get_u...!

[1] https://www.ispot.tv/ad/IXwc/life-alert-tragic-outcome

Haha, I wondered if anyone would catch the reference. Sadly, they're disappearing along with "plop plop fizz fizz", "where's the beef", "hey mikey", "hello betty" or "gee your hair smells terrific".

Yep. One of my personal favorites was "We make your dreams come true!"[0] which was a local thing where I come from, but is truly iconic!

Not to mention the "Lullabuy of old Broadway."[1]

[0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1uosIpj-CRs

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UwlvkUMsDgI

This was one of my tops. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fucxG-he2qU Keith Hernandez, Emmitt Smith, and Walt Frazier. There were older commercials for this, but Emmitt was just soo funny in it. "Ohhh it's bad"

That's definitely a good one, but I always dug the "Rejected!" "No play for Mister Gray!"[0]

[0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dQNkKTlDilY

I accept disability of some sort as a valid reason to use it. I know I would. You already have to make hard trade-offs. But an average person? I just don't get it.

And that does not even touch the corporate world. How does a company protect against disclosure of things that are otherwise a corporate secret ( especially in today's increasingly WFH world )?

> How does a company protect against disclosure of things that are otherwise a corporate secret

My work is all open source, so no problems there :-)

> I've fallen and I can't get up

The apple watch has fall detection, it will automatically call emergency services if it detects a fall and you don't cancel the SOS.

Can't you use your phone for this? I always make an effort to put my phone on the floor next to my car when I'm working under it.

Of course, either way, it's only really helpful if you're able to speak.

Dialing 911 on your phone will get the EMTs sent to your house if you say nothing.

Having the phone in your pocket works if you can move. Having the smart speaker works if you can speak. If you can do neither, hope somebody finds you soon.

Oh, I meant saying, "<Okay Google>|<Hey Siri>, it's an emergency" Which should work just as well on a phone as it would with a smart speaker.

But that last point is important, I always tell people before I'm about to do something dangerous: "if you hear a noise, please come and check on me."

> old people who want to show they have something cool and hip

These are always pretty amusing. I went on vacation with a girl I was dating one summer, and her parents brought their Alexa with them. Her dad thought it was so cool, and he loved to show me by saying "alexa, play <music>" three times until he got frustrated enough to just do it with his phone. Then, he'd say "hey alexa, you're a b*tch," and laugh when it responded by telling him that was rude.

Why would anyone pay money for that???

I tell people who show me their smartwatches and features "oh yeah? My watch tells me the time!"

Mine has a calculator.

oh yeah? Mine tells the time.

I only know one person that actually uses the "smart" feature on one of those speakers.

I wonder if in a lot of cases, for the people it is not actually about the smart stuff (that might be a plus or just out of curiosity), but convenience and aesthetics. Most people I know, don't have a traditional sound setup at home anymore and instead just use a bluetooth speaker. But the ones made for outdoor use look pretty ugly indoors, whereas the smart speakers are more designed to disappear in the home decor.

Personally I think, bookshelf speakers with bluetooth functionally would be a better option for most, but from what I have seen people are often not even aware of their existence and the ones with good audio as well a modern look (in case you don't like the classical black or brown boxes) tend to be in higher price classes than the smart speakers.

The speakers are convenient and most people aren't worried about these kinds of invasions of privacy.

I know your statement is accurate, but my immediate question is that of why. The information is there. If it is there, it is going to be used. Why wouldn't an average person be worried? Because it did not affect them yet? It is not part of the culture?

It's not clear to most people how the information they give to a smart speaker could be used against them. What will the government do to me if it knows that I asked for directions or ordered a pizza?

I remember a few years back when Google let you view a map of your daily movements over the past few years or something. I saw this map and turned off location tracking. Most people I talked to thought this was neat and forgot about it shortly after, because no one is using this information to hurt people in visible ways.

>I remember a few years back when Google let you view a map of your daily movements over the past few years or something.

This still exists: https://www.google.com/maps/timeline

Do you think people would start caring of that information affected their credit scores and health insurance? "You visited Dominos 3 times this week."

You need to give up your data in order to enjoy modern conveniences. Do you trust your credit card not to secretly sell information to your health insurer? What about your grocery store's rewards program?

You do have a point. In case of credit card, when you volunteer your information ( and your permission to check information about you ) for the convenience of plastic, you technically do give up your data. But as a counter argument I would like to point out that that trade is restricted by various laws and compliance can be onerous. Now, I still did not see credible news of credit card companies selling personally identifiable data of, say, dunkin donuts users. But then, we all know of the story about store sending baby stuff to a family before parents knew their kid told them she is pregnant.

I don't use rewards programs ( though now those seem to have migrated to collecting phone numbers ).

But no, to answer your question, I don't trust them not to abuse this information so there are things I simply pay cash for. I think last time that issue came up for me was when one bank seemingly decided ( and backtracked ) that legal gun purchases are verbotten ( https://dailycaller.com/2013/01/16/bank-of-america-credit-de... ). Though that particular cases again seemed to deal more with individual specialist decision and was not a policy decision.

Do you trust your credit card not to secretly sell information to your health insurer?

Yes. But I live in Europe, where that trust is anchored in laws that still have some teeth left.

>Why wouldn't an average person be worried? Because it did not affect them yet? It is not part of the culture?

Because the average person doesn't understand the pervasive nature of the surveillance capitalism model.

In fact, as Shoshanna Zuboff[0] discusses in her book, The Age of Surveillance Capitalism[1], those engaged in such activities take great pains to make sure that you don't notice it.

We're only talking about this here, now because it's highly visible and the state has taken an interest in using such surveillance data for its purposes.

You might think it's a good thing that people are starting to notice, and on some levels it is. However, this sort of activity has been going on for so long and is so embedded in the culture that people just don't pay attention any more.

But this sort of thing has a long history of happening, mostly unimpeded in the US at least. Credit reporting agencies/scoring and the data brokers that go with them have been around for decades.

Advertising Research[2][3] goes back a century, with automated data analysis reaching back to the late 1960s. Statistical techniques developed then were refined in the early to mid 1970s at Grey Advertising among other agencies and moved into the advertising mainstream by the 1980s with projects like Backer Spielvogel Bates' GlobalScan[4].

However the costs of collecting primary data across the globe was prohibitive for all but the largest advertising agencies/consumer products companies.

This limited both the scope and effectiveness of such research.

Since the advent of "Social Media" the sorts of data collected by projects like GlobalScan at the cost of millions/annum are now freely provided by vastly more people.

That drives the thirst for more data, more detail, more ability to identify target markets. And that's great. For marketers. Less so for those who are constantly bombarded by increasingly individualized ads for products, services and political messages.

This wholesale collection of data about people has been so successful that it has become an important part of many organizations -- even if data collection/analysis/brokerage isn't their core business.

What we see now with Amazon Echo/Ring, Google Nest, etc. is just the logical (if incredibly evil) evolution of this market trend.

That law enforcement wants to tap into this enormous stream of data isn't remarkable. They've been data mining pen registers[9] and phone location data (using the Third-Party Doctrine[10] as justification) via telecom records. And Stingray[5] tracking has been a thing for quite some time.

They also dig through social media too.

And the hubris/liberty endangering partnership of Amazon (with Ring devices) and law enforcement[6] is quite frightening.

And this isn't the first time that police have attempted to access conversations from "smart" speakers to use in criminal prosecutions[7][8].

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shoshana_Zuboff

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Age_of_Surveillance_Capita...

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Market_research

[3] https://thearf.org/about-arf/

[4] https://www.coursehero.com/file/p7tsoeb/Backer-Spielvogel-Ba...

[5] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stingray_phone_tracker

[6] https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2019/08/28/doorbel...

[7] https://www.thedailybeast.com/police-seek-amazon-echo-data-i...

[8] https://www.engadget.com/2019-11-02-florida-police-obtain-al...

[9] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pen_register

[10] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third-party_doctrine

Edit: Added detail about Pen Registers and the Third-Party Doctrine.

>However, this sort of activity has been going on for so long and is so embedded in the culture that people just don't pay attention any more.

"The Social Dilemma" on Netflix may help with that. As someone already in tech it wasn't particularly enlightening for me (and the "reenactment" acting they included was way over the top), but it is accessible and apparently a good eye opener for "lay people" I know who've seen it.

> Still, it boggles my mind. Why would you voluntarily do it? My parents only invited trusted friends to ensure nothing 'questionable' made it to the authorities ( former soviet republic ). People today brazenly broadcast it.

> I honestly do not get it.

Perhaps the important differences between us and the USSR are having a democratic legislative process and a fair judicial system, and the relevant extent of our surveillance apparatus is a secondary concern.

(Obviously, there are problems with our legislative and judicial systems - the point is that they are better than the former soviet republics'.)

It's about convenience. Cooking while having full control over what's playing in the background. Following along with recipes. Asking random questions you might usually take out your phone to Google. Coming home after a long day, sinking into your couch, and able to say "play some relaxing music" to soothe your mind.

Not saying that the privacy aspects aren't valid concerns or that convenience should outweigh them, but quite a few people here seem to not be able to see any upsides.

To each it’s own, i find all that tech for just listening music stressing, also add the maintenance aspect of it (accounts, passwords, updates, create playlists, share) for me there’s nothing like selecting a vinyl pulling it out, put in the player and just listen to it in my old Hi-Fi.

Not to mention the better sound quality.

Not only do users violate their own privacy, they make it harder for everyone else to keep their own. At least in the US, its getting harder to have a screen/computer-free home audio setup! Receivers all have embedded streaming devices; many speakers do too. Playback devices are all becoming niche, and eventually even the used market will eventually dry up, too.

"Hey wire tap, whats a good recipe for pancakes?"

> I honestly do not get it.

You underestimate the power of social status and conspicuous consumption[1]. I would say it's been the fundamental driver of our society for quite some time now (maybe since early 1920's?, briefly paused for WW2)

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conspicuous_consumption

I think that may be a factor, but I also remember that Mark Zuckerberg goes to some lengths to protect his privacy ( https://nypost.com/2020/07/04/mark-zuckerberg-accused-of-col... ). It would appear that true power can buy privacy, while gadgets are for the hopeful arrivals.

edit: added link

>Why would you voluntarily do it?

I can tell you why I personally don't care. First off here in Germany I'm pretty sure it's not legally possible for authorities to request my voice commands randomly and due to GDPR I can delete all my recordings at any point, and turn off personalisation meaning they wouldn't use my individual data.

Secondly I just don't say anything in my home that's super secret, I live in an apartment and I'm pretty sure the neighbours can hear me talking on my balcony, and I'm in voice chats most of the day these days due to covid which probably accidentally means more people listen in because I forget to press mute than some guy at Amazon.

> I'm pretty sure it's not legally possible

Legality wasn't really an issue for authorities in Germany before, even if it contradicted our basic law. Of course it was for national security. It is my goto excuse too if I break any laws.

There is a lot of room between paranoia and being extremely naive in context of state powers.

> Secondly I just don't say anything in my home that's super secret

Then why would the state need capabilities to get this not super secret data?

I honestly expected more from Germany in this regard, especially with the experience of the past.

After years of listening to ex-soviets speaking nostalgically about how things were better under the Soviets, the people in the West have unconsciously fallen for the full spectrum mommy state and our overlords are merely addressing this unspoken popular demand to live in a surveillance state. This state of affair naturally reflects the West's advancement relative to other parts of the globe. So "resistance is futile but if you join early you can have a short id!". So don't lose your place in the line bothering yourself over triffles such as overwhelming asymmetries of your social existence. The future is now comrade, buck it up [bsts: /s]

Reply on news.ycombinator.com