3 ms·

Since the financial aspect isn't obvious to you, here's how it works: dev: "We could sell a better product if you gave us full transcripts, and you could make

Since the financial aspect isn't obvious to you, here's how it works: dev: "We could sell a better product if you gave us full transcripts, and you could make more money with it" Amazon: "OK, here you go" > It is clear to anyone that if word got out they were doing that at a bare minimum they would lose all the money they spent towards R&D and the entire product line would have to be shut down. Why? What would cause that? Other companies in similar situations keep on trucking just fine. And not worth the risk? What risk? We generally don't fine companies any significant amount when their data leaks, either intentionally or not. Customers don't really leave either, so there's no actual risk. Also, I am absolutely up for changing my mind, but this isn't really a "factual" debate, it's opinion on whether Amazon would be willing to let go of customer data. I have no doubt that they would, and expect that they do let go of customer data. I'd actually love to be proved wrong. I really want an Echo, but won't because of said privacy issues. > But the amount of money it would take to process all the audio from all the Alexas and make use of it is astounding even by government standard. It doesn't have to be "all customers data", they can very easily pick and choose which data gets processed. > I see no more reason to give up my Echos due to government surveillance than I do my phone which has even more data on me and I'm not giving up my phone. And that's fine. I don't think you should give up your phone if you don't want to. But saying "I don't want to give up my phone, so Alexa is totally safe!" is silly at best.

throwaway2016a 9y ago
I'll take that in reverse order: > And that's fine. I don't think you should give up your phone if you don't want to. But saying "I don't want to give up my phone, so Alexa is totally safe!" is silly at best. I wasn't arguing it is safe from government. I honestly have no argument to reasonable assume it could be. I was saying that if the government wants to listen to me they can. But I honestly don't think Alexa makes it easier. It's already pretty darn easy. However, to my other point I was making, arguing it is safe from capitalism (or perhaps safe because of capitalism): That's not actually how the conversation would go. You're only looking at one side. To get a change like that to happen at a corporation it is not enough to prove financial benefit you also need to prove that it outweighs the risk. I most certainly, absolutely see that if you take the risk as 0 probability then there is money there. A change that large would go through layers: - Project manager - General Manager - Director - VP - Accountants and Actuaries - Legal Council - Back to VP - CxO Having done one of two of these myself and dealt with the companies that buy that kind of data at more than one point in my career I can tell you that the almost certainly the report from the actuaries will show: "The risk to Amazon Prime membership, law suits, and damage to market confidence is calculatedly too high relative to the reward of sale of customer data" And that is if someone doesn't kill it for ethical reasons. Or legal council doesn't kill it. Since while not a death blow, being fired for being the public face of an ethics violation is typically not a good career move. It takes a lot to get even a good idea approved at a company that size. Takes even more to get a terrible idea approved.
- CaptSpify 9y ago
  I'm sorry, but I can't take your argument seriously. Big companies put terrible and "risky" ideas like this into practice all the time. Yeah, I don't believe that it's just one small conversation, but the length doesn't matter. What matters is that many companies are super willing to do this, and Amazon isn't the most reputable either. Believing that companies like them do care about risk, when there would be no real penalty for doing this, is simply silly.
  - throwaway2016a 9y ago
    I'm sorry, you lost me, I give up. > when there would be no real penalty for doing this, Huh? Amazon: Amazon Prime + Amazon AWS (developers pay to host Alexa skills) + Amazon Music Google: Google Play Apple: Home Kit licensing + iTunes + App Store + Apple Music Unlimited + Stock price How would losing even a tiny fraction of those be "no real penalty"... just 10% of Amazon Prime subscribers is $100 - $200 million per year. I am not saying companies don't take risk. You have to if you want to make a profit. No company ever has made a profit without either taking a lot of risk or being insanely lucky. With the risk takers being far more common. I'm saying do the math. Amazon Prime is a multi billion dollar business. You'd have to be an idiot to take that risk. Smart companies make money by taking the right risks not all risks. This is a bad risk. It'd be as if Bezos decided suddenly to turn an AWS availability zone into a Bitcoin Mining facility. I'm done. You win.

throwaway2016a 9y ago

I'll take that in reverse order: > And that's fine. I don't think you should give up your phone if you don't want to. But saying "I don't want to give up my phone, so Alexa is totally safe!" is silly at best. I wasn't arguing it is safe from government. I honestly have no argument to reasonable assume it could be. I was saying that if the government wants to listen to me they can. But I honestly don't think Alexa makes it easier. It's already pretty darn easy. However, to my other point I was making, arguing it is safe from capitalism (or perhaps safe because of capitalism): That's not actually how the conversation would go. You're only looking at one side. To get a change like that to happen at a corporation it is not enough to prove financial benefit you also need to prove that it outweighs the risk. I most certainly, absolutely see that if you take the risk as 0 probability then there is money there. A change that large would go through layers: - Project manager - General Manager - Director - VP - Accountants and Actuaries - Legal Council - Back to VP - CxO Having done one of two of these myself and dealt with the companies that buy that kind of data at more than one point in my career I can tell you that the almost certainly the report from the actuaries will show: "The risk to Amazon Prime membership, law suits, and damage to market confidence is calculatedly too high relative to the reward of sale of customer data" And that is if someone doesn't kill it for ethical reasons. Or legal council doesn't kill it. Since while not a death blow, being fired for being the public face of an ethics violation is typically not a good career move. It takes a lot to get even a good idea approved at a company that size. Takes even more to get a terrible idea approved.

CaptSpify 9y ago
I'm sorry, but I can't take your argument seriously. Big companies put terrible and "risky" ideas like this into practice all the time. Yeah, I don't believe that it's just one small conversation, but the length doesn't matter. What matters is that many companies are super willing to do this, and Amazon isn't the most reputable either. Believing that companies like them do care about risk, when there would be no real penalty for doing this, is simply silly.
- throwaway2016a 9y ago
  I'm sorry, you lost me, I give up. > when there would be no real penalty for doing this, Huh? Amazon: Amazon Prime + Amazon AWS (developers pay to host Alexa skills) + Amazon Music Google: Google Play Apple: Home Kit licensing + iTunes + App Store + Apple Music Unlimited + Stock price How would losing even a tiny fraction of those be "no real penalty"... just 10% of Amazon Prime subscribers is $100 - $200 million per year. I am not saying companies don't take risk. You have to if you want to make a profit. No company ever has made a profit without either taking a lot of risk or being insanely lucky. With the risk takers being far more common. I'm saying do the math. Amazon Prime is a multi billion dollar business. You'd have to be an idiot to take that risk. Smart companies make money by taking the right risks not all risks. This is a bad risk. It'd be as if Bezos decided suddenly to turn an AWS availability zone into a Bitcoin Mining facility. I'm done. You win.