5 ms·

The difference between this product and 1984 is that we choose to install Google home into our places of residence for our own convenience. We are not forced in

The difference between this product and 1984 is that we choose to install Google home into our places of residence for our own convenience. We are not forced into installing said software. That having been said, if Google chooses to release the data to the government, it has an obligation to tell us about that or it will be behaving unethically. As matters stand, however, this is just a new technology with pros and cons.

mason240 10y ago
Until being the only person without one is seen a sign of guilt. Similar to bodycams for people like teachers or police. People argue they can wear them if they like to protect themselves against accusations, until they are so widely used that opting-out is not longer an option because it's seen a sign you are hiding something.
chinathrow 10y ago
> That having been said, if Google chooses to release the data to the government, it has an obligation to tell us about that or it will be behaving unethically. No, as far as I know that would be incorrect with NSLs in place. Gag order and such.
- hc07 10y ago
  Every sensor can have a "canary" mode indicator. It bypasses NSL by claiming the negative: "Nope I have not been served by an NSL yet". This has been successfully used by companies to indicate that "the canary has died" in a surveillance order.
  - dredmorbius 10y ago
    Now that is an interesting suggestion.
  - dredmorbius 10y ago
    Now that is an interesting suggestion.
dredmorbius 10y ago
Do you choose them in the home of a friend you're visiting? Do you choose them in the office you work in? Do you choose them in the store you're shopping in? Do you choose them in the cafe you're talking in? Do you choose them at the bus stop you're waiting in? Do you choose them in the transit you're riding in? Do you choose them in the car-share you're riding in? That element of choice can close very quickly. Sensors will and are turning up in light switches, lights, appliances, stereos, video and audio systems, advertising displays, and more. Unless such devices are required, say, by law, to comply with some form of universal off switch.
- pacala 10y ago
  Are you speaking with the window open? Bad choice, your neighbor's advanced far field microphones are picking up every word you're saying.
  - dredmorbius 10y ago
    And laser mics can be aimed against glass. Both have to be specifically placed, however. Common devices with location tracking and audio monitoring capabilities already exist. They can be targeted for monitoring, and to the best of my knowledge, are. Some are actively monitoring activity on an ongoing basis -- e.g., someone's voice-enabled TV sets. I really can't even keep up with all this crap any more. All of which is moot to the original point: that people can choose whether or not this equipment is in their environment or not. Effectively they cannot.
    - pacala 10y ago
      > All of which is moot to the original point: that people can choose whether or not this equipment is in their environment or not. Effectively they cannot. Absolutely. Just pointing out that we're on the path to adding always on cloud connected far field microphones in every other house in the country. Good luck "choosing" to not be listened to. The largest danger is self-censorship. "What is the risk somebody is listening to non-correct speech? I'd better watch what I say and not formulate non-correct speech."

mason240 10y ago

Until being the only person without one is seen a sign of guilt. Similar to bodycams for people like teachers or police. People argue they can wear them if they like to protect themselves against accusations, until they are so widely used that opting-out is not longer an option because it's seen a sign you are hiding something.

chinathrow 10y ago

> That having been said, if Google chooses to release the data to the government, it has an obligation to tell us about that or it will be behaving unethically. No, as far as I know that would be incorrect with NSLs in place. Gag order and such.

hc07 10y ago
Every sensor can have a "canary" mode indicator. It bypasses NSL by claiming the negative: "Nope I have not been served by an NSL yet". This has been successfully used by companies to indicate that "the canary has died" in a surveillance order.
- dredmorbius 10y ago
  Now that is an interesting suggestion.
- dredmorbius 10y ago
  Now that is an interesting suggestion.

dredmorbius 10y ago

Do you choose them in the home of a friend you're visiting? Do you choose them in the office you work in? Do you choose them in the store you're shopping in? Do you choose them in the cafe you're talking in? Do you choose them at the bus stop you're waiting in? Do you choose them in the transit you're riding in? Do you choose them in the car-share you're riding in? That element of choice can close very quickly. Sensors will and are turning up in light switches, lights, appliances, stereos, video and audio systems, advertising displays, and more. Unless such devices are required, say, by law, to comply with some form of universal off switch.

pacala 10y ago
Are you speaking with the window open? Bad choice, your neighbor's advanced far field microphones are picking up every word you're saying.
- dredmorbius 10y ago
  And laser mics can be aimed against glass. Both have to be specifically placed, however. Common devices with location tracking and audio monitoring capabilities already exist. They can be targeted for monitoring, and to the best of my knowledge, are. Some are actively monitoring activity on an ongoing basis -- e.g., someone's voice-enabled TV sets. I really can't even keep up with all this crap any more. All of which is moot to the original point: that people can choose whether or not this equipment is in their environment or not. Effectively they cannot.
  - pacala 10y ago
    > All of which is moot to the original point: that people can choose whether or not this equipment is in their environment or not. Effectively they cannot. Absolutely. Just pointing out that we're on the path to adding always on cloud connected far field microphones in every other house in the country. Good luck "choosing" to not be listened to. The largest danger is self-censorship. "What is the risk somebody is listening to non-correct speech? I'd better watch what I say and not formulate non-correct speech."