4 ms·

The EFF must feel totally hopeless at this point. People are buying microphones with internet connections and sticking them in their homes. They're making the c

by M_Grey 10y ago

The EFF must feel totally hopeless at this point. People are buying microphones with internet connections and sticking them in their homes. They're making the choice to buy "smart" IoT shit that spies on them. They're at a point of defending a major company selling that stuff, because they didn't instantly roll over when approached by law enforcement. It's like... PETA complimenting a butcher on a clean kill. I don't blame them though... who knew the great battle over privacy would be lost before it even started, because people want their toaster to go online?

jasonkostempski 10y ago
The EFF is more concerned with the legal side of things. They do more than their fair share trying to inform people of what's going on but that can only go so far, it's a fact that most people do not give a hoot. The important fight is keeping laws around the stuff as sane as possible.
- M_Grey 10y ago
  Right, but those people who don't give a hoot elect the politicians who write the laws. They're focusing on the one aspect of the problem they can possibly approach, but it's ultimately like a circular shoving match... utterly hopeless. The EFF can't pressure lawmakers if they can't rally people to apply that pressure. When most people just shrug and buy an IoT toaster, it's not hard to see how this goes.
  - jasonkostempski 10y ago
    I think some of the big tech companies get it, or at least the the value of having "us" on their side, and have some influence on law makers. It might help that those people vote too, since if someone goes around saying they want legal taps into toaster, the people with the toasters might start thinking about how that's kind of scary.
FTA 10y ago
> who knew the great battle over privacy would be lost before it even started, because people want their toaster to go online? I think the issue is there are no good alternatives for the typical consumer. There needs to be a push back on companies to provide these sorts of smart home/tv/music technologies for the public in a distributed manner, i.e. components not needing to connect back to a company server but instead a local one. Sure, the average HN reader can probably set something up like that, but until a solution without tons of coding and assemblage comes along, we will be stuck in this status quo. EFF could be a starting point to rally people behind creating a market demand and supporting companies in a quest for privacy-minded solutions.
- M_Grey 10y ago
  What does the typical consumer actually get out of a networked refrigerator, or a smart TV (which tend to be almost universally inferior to even inexpensive add-ons to make them 'smart')? The IoT seems to be based on virtually pure marketing spin and manufactured demand, with a really predictable resulting mega botnet.
  - CaptSpify 10y ago
    > What does the typical consumer actually get out of a networked refrigerator, or a smart TV... So many things. Just because you can't figure out how to use a feature, doesn't mean it's not useful. Maybe I need to see how many eggs I have left, or what temperature a corner of the fridge is, or have a way to tell when my milk is going bad? IoT is bringing in some potentially cool stuff, but being dependent on an on-line "service", and being closed and proprietary is making it worthless.
    - M_Grey 10y ago
      >Maybe I need to see how many eggs I have left, or what temperature a corner of the fridge is, or have a way to tell when my milk is going bad? And for the ability to do that without just... you know... opening the damned fridge you're willing to buy into the IoT. That's an insane tradeoff, for benefits the typical consumer would laugh at you for buying into.
ReverseCold 10y ago
"Hey Siri" "Ok Google" Most people have it on. You already carry around an always on, internet connected mic, why not add another one? Even if it's "not on", how do you know it isn't?
- M_Grey 10y ago
  Because I take the battery out and put the whole thing in a padded box when I'm not using it, and in general when I am using it I'm aware that the possibility exists that I'm not actually private. Edit: Just to be clear, I don't do this because I think my life is so interesting that anyone who could snoop, would snoop. I do however believe that there's value in having a consistent set of behaviors and standards around these issues, in the same way that we do with sanitation. There is the added bonus that should you ever find the need to keep a secret, you won't give the change away with a change in your behavior.
kardos 10y ago
> who knew the great battle over privacy would be lost before it even started, because people want their toaster to go online? I really despise this sentiment, it's quite defeatist and comes across as the "resistance is futile" talking point from the "privacy is dead" camp What we need is some kind of spousal privilege [1] or secrecy of correspondence [2] for the internet age, ie, for IoT things. Surreptitious recordings from phones, messaging apps, "amazon echo"s, xbone cameras, etc, should be impermissible in court (or some variation on this theme). We struck a balance in the past, we can do it again. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spousal_privilege https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spousal_privilege [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secrecy_of_correspondence https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secrecy_of_correspondence
- M_Grey 10y ago
  It's easy to accuse people of "defeatism", or "alarmism", when really you just don't like the simple truth. Your idea is nice, but unless you're capable of producing a workable roadmap and seeing it enacted, who really cares? Everyone has "good ideas" and many people have good intentions, but if you can't produce results that differ from the next guy it just doesn't matter. Unless you're Churchill rallying a nation to fight, you're in no position to accuse anyone of defeatism for pointing out the reality we live in.
  - kardos 10y ago
    My point was more along the lines of "lets stop repeating the 'give up' mantra" and move forward to "lets explore how we might rectify the situation". But alas you are also right, I did not present a shovel ready legal pathway to success.
    - M_Grey 10y ago
      I'm not suggesting that anyone give up, I was suggesting that the EFF must feel despair in the context of their efforts. I would argue that there is more need than ever to fight, but that fight hasn't really materialized yet. Outside of places like HN, so few people appreciate that there even is a fight, and fewer care. That may change, but until it does, the best you can do is educate people.
dredmorbius 10y ago
Even if you don't buy the latest Google or Amazon or Microsoft or Facebook HomeSpy, the ability to get away from other devices is ... difficult at best. And not just PocketSpys and MobileAdDeliveryTablets. I've recently been through the experience of replacing a major home appliance for a friend. One which need not intrinsically be electronically controlled. But is. With intrinsic BlueTooth connectivity (and quite possibly WiFi, I've been afraid to ask). After units #1 and #2 arrived DOA, with electronic faults, I went through the exercise of looking for a device without integrated electronics. So far as I can tell, they simply do not exist. Perhaps if you were willing to buy a used model from the 1990s or prior -- and even in the 90s, there were electronics, they just weren't connected to anything else. After unit #3 arrived with exterior physical damage matching a previous shipment (and directly over a very insufficiently armoured printed circuit board), and having failed to identify an alternative, we had all three boards replaced (at manufacturer cost). That's $300 in parts, or 20% of the cost of the unit, plus labour. I'm wondering how that breaks down on a per-unit basis, though our experience suggests "poorly". I've no confidence that the electronics are suitably protected from environmental or other damage over the life of this appliance, which I estimate will be substantially less than the 20+ years of its far more robust 1960s ancestors. Which did the fundamental job very much as well. This, I'll add, was an experience with an expensive and major purchase, based on physical characteristics. The amount of debugging and security proofing going into the $10 - $100 price-point light-bulbs, thermostats, toasters, humidifiers, security (hah!) cameras, etc., can be at most a very small fraction of that retail figure. I'm less than enthused. And feel that exceedingly strict legal protections will have to be imposed on manufacturers and/or retailers.
westmeal 10y ago
The age of the botnet is nigh.
sanguy 10y ago
It started with Google - people willing to give up personal info for cool free services. That was the start of the privacy death spiral.

by M_Grey 10y ago

jasonkostempski 10y ago

The EFF is more concerned with the legal side of things. They do more than their fair share trying to inform people of what's going on but that can only go so far, it's a fact that most people do not give a hoot. The important fight is keeping laws around the stuff as sane as possible.

M_Grey 10y ago
Right, but those people who don't give a hoot elect the politicians who write the laws. They're focusing on the one aspect of the problem they can possibly approach, but it's ultimately like a circular shoving match... utterly hopeless. The EFF can't pressure lawmakers if they can't rally people to apply that pressure. When most people just shrug and buy an IoT toaster, it's not hard to see how this goes.
- jasonkostempski 10y ago
  I think some of the big tech companies get it, or at least the the value of having "us" on their side, and have some influence on law makers. It might help that those people vote too, since if someone goes around saying they want legal taps into toaster, the people with the toasters might start thinking about how that's kind of scary.

FTA 10y ago

> who knew the great battle over privacy would be lost before it even started, because people want their toaster to go online? I think the issue is there are no good alternatives for the typical consumer. There needs to be a push back on companies to provide these sorts of smart home/tv/music technologies for the public in a distributed manner, i.e. components not needing to connect back to a company server but instead a local one. Sure, the average HN reader can probably set something up like that, but until a solution without tons of coding and assemblage comes along, we will be stuck in this status quo. EFF could be a starting point to rally people behind creating a market demand and supporting companies in a quest for privacy-minded solutions.

M_Grey 10y ago
What does the typical consumer actually get out of a networked refrigerator, or a smart TV (which tend to be almost universally inferior to even inexpensive add-ons to make them 'smart')? The IoT seems to be based on virtually pure marketing spin and manufactured demand, with a really predictable resulting mega botnet.
- CaptSpify 10y ago
  > What does the typical consumer actually get out of a networked refrigerator, or a smart TV... So many things. Just because you can't figure out how to use a feature, doesn't mean it's not useful. Maybe I need to see how many eggs I have left, or what temperature a corner of the fridge is, or have a way to tell when my milk is going bad? IoT is bringing in some potentially cool stuff, but being dependent on an on-line "service", and being closed and proprietary is making it worthless.
  - M_Grey 10y ago
    >Maybe I need to see how many eggs I have left, or what temperature a corner of the fridge is, or have a way to tell when my milk is going bad? And for the ability to do that without just... you know... opening the damned fridge you're willing to buy into the IoT. That's an insane tradeoff, for benefits the typical consumer would laugh at you for buying into.

ReverseCold 10y ago

"Hey Siri" "Ok Google" Most people have it on. You already carry around an always on, internet connected mic, why not add another one? Even if it's "not on", how do you know it isn't?

M_Grey 10y ago
Because I take the battery out and put the whole thing in a padded box when I'm not using it, and in general when I am using it I'm aware that the possibility exists that I'm not actually private. Edit: Just to be clear, I don't do this because I think my life is so interesting that anyone who could snoop, would snoop. I do however believe that there's value in having a consistent set of behaviors and standards around these issues, in the same way that we do with sanitation. There is the added bonus that should you ever find the need to keep a secret, you won't give the change away with a change in your behavior.

kardos 10y ago

> who knew the great battle over privacy would be lost before it even started, because people want their toaster to go online? I really despise this sentiment, it's quite defeatist and comes across as the "resistance is futile" talking point from the "privacy is dead" camp What we need is some kind of spousal privilege [1] or secrecy of correspondence [2] for the internet age, ie, for IoT things. Surreptitious recordings from phones, messaging apps, "amazon echo"s, xbone cameras, etc, should be impermissible in court (or some variation on this theme). We struck a balance in the past, we can do it again. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spousal_privilege https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spousal_privilege [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secrecy_of_correspondence https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secrecy_of_correspondence

M_Grey 10y ago
It's easy to accuse people of "defeatism", or "alarmism", when really you just don't like the simple truth. Your idea is nice, but unless you're capable of producing a workable roadmap and seeing it enacted, who really cares? Everyone has "good ideas" and many people have good intentions, but if you can't produce results that differ from the next guy it just doesn't matter. Unless you're Churchill rallying a nation to fight, you're in no position to accuse anyone of defeatism for pointing out the reality we live in.
- kardos 10y ago
  My point was more along the lines of "lets stop repeating the 'give up' mantra" and move forward to "lets explore how we might rectify the situation". But alas you are also right, I did not present a shovel ready legal pathway to success.
  - M_Grey 10y ago
    I'm not suggesting that anyone give up, I was suggesting that the EFF must feel despair in the context of their efforts. I would argue that there is more need than ever to fight, but that fight hasn't really materialized yet. Outside of places like HN, so few people appreciate that there even is a fight, and fewer care. That may change, but until it does, the best you can do is educate people.

dredmorbius 10y ago

Even if you don't buy the latest Google or Amazon or Microsoft or Facebook HomeSpy, the ability to get away from other devices is ... difficult at best. And not just PocketSpys and MobileAdDeliveryTablets. I've recently been through the experience of replacing a major home appliance for a friend. One which need not intrinsically be electronically controlled. But is. With intrinsic BlueTooth connectivity (and quite possibly WiFi, I've been afraid to ask). After units #1 and #2 arrived DOA, with electronic faults, I went through the exercise of looking for a device without integrated electronics. So far as I can tell, they simply do not exist. Perhaps if you were willing to buy a used model from the 1990s or prior -- and even in the 90s, there were electronics, they just weren't connected to anything else. After unit #3 arrived with exterior physical damage matching a previous shipment (and directly over a very insufficiently armoured printed circuit board), and having failed to identify an alternative, we had all three boards replaced (at manufacturer cost). That's $300 in parts, or 20% of the cost of the unit, plus labour. I'm wondering how that breaks down on a per-unit basis, though our experience suggests "poorly". I've no confidence that the electronics are suitably protected from environmental or other damage over the life of this appliance, which I estimate will be substantially less than the 20+ years of its far more robust 1960s ancestors. Which did the fundamental job very much as well. This, I'll add, was an experience with an expensive and major purchase, based on physical characteristics. The amount of debugging and security proofing going into the $10 - $100 price-point light-bulbs, thermostats, toasters, humidifiers, security (hah!) cameras, etc., can be at most a very small fraction of that retail figure. I'm less than enthused. And feel that exceedingly strict legal protections will have to be imposed on manufacturers and/or retailers.

westmeal 10y ago

The age of the botnet is nigh.

sanguy 10y ago

It started with Google - people willing to give up personal info for cool free services. That was the start of the privacy death spiral.