6 ms·

I wonder how would you even do that? It's not a tape recorder, where someone has to physically press a button, there are no moving parts, thus it must be softwa

• rolha-capoeira 8y ago
  I assume they mean that the light should not be accessible to software, just wired so that "if camera is on, light is on"
  • dpark 8y ago
    Which means the light is always on. The device must be listening or the wake word won't work.
    • millstone 8y ago
      Maybe the light could be tied to network activity? The light is on if the WiFi chip is powered.
      • dpark 8y ago
        You’re kidding I hope. WiFi is always on. WiFi doesn’t disconnect just because you aren’t actively moving data. You’d be pretty annoyed if every time you wanted to send or receive data your device had to reconnect.
    • squeaky-clean 8y ago
      There are usually 2 stages, a local processor that can only detect the wake word, and then once that hears the wakeword it begins streaming data to the internet.
      • dpark 8y ago
        I’m aware. The microphone is always on in order for stage 1 to work.
        • squeaky-clean 8y ago
          It doesn't need to be based on the microphone, it can be based on that second processor. It can be based on network activity (my USB Wifi adapter blinks whenever data is sent/received, even though it's connected 24/7, I don't see why anything else couldn't do that). We're also discussing theoretical hardware changes, there's no reason it can't have 2 sets of microphones where one is hardwired only to the wake-word processor which has no direct connection to the main processor except some one-way signalling, and the LED is hardwired to the second set.
          • dpark 8y ago
            Your WiFi led is probably blinking pretty constantly, which would freak people out if they were told that blinking means active listening (as opposed to checking it updates or any of dozens of other things that might use the network). It’s probably also software controlled anyway. The idea that there would somehow be a dedicated wake word microphone is a little ridiculous. Firstly, no one would trust this supposed 1-way connection. Second, it would require a dedicated processor to make the wake word even work, driving up costs. Third, the echo uses an array of microphones so your wake word would either be unreliable or drive costs up further as you duplicate the entire array. Hardly a net win. The reality is that if you don’t trust amazon to do the right thing you shouldn’t install their listening device in your home. (Likewise for your phone.)
• ctrl-j 8y ago
  Inline voltage to the microphone? A microphone is still a physical device.
  • laumars 8y ago
    True but the microphone is always on (otherwise how would the device be able to listen for voice commands). Thus what you're describing would effectively just be a power LED rather than a recording LED.
• kinsomo 8y ago
  > where someone has to physically press a button, there are no moving parts, thus it must be software controlled. If the microphone uses an amplifier, you could wire an LED to light when power is supplied to the amp. The indicator light is physically part of the circuit, so its operation cannot be modified by software. There are probably other, better, ways to do it, I'm not an electronics guy.
  • DiabloD3 8y ago
    Due to watchword detection, the microphone amp would always be on.
    • kinsomo 8y ago
      > Due to watchword detection, the microphone amp would always be on. I don't think that would be a bad thing; especially if there's a switch to disable the mic. When you turn it off, you'll get reliable feedback to know it's actually off. I think it's important that these kinds of devices have simple feedback and control mechanisms that can be independently verified and reasoned about. Software is too opaque and too untrustworthy.
      • jclardy 8y ago
        I don't disagree, but the light ring is also important to know that it actually heard your command. Having it on all the time would make the UX much worse. Unless it was a separate light.
        • kinsomo 8y ago
          > I don't disagree, but the light ring is also important to know that it actually heard your command. Having it on all the time would make the UX much worse. Unless it was a separate light. I see that, I think it would be best as a separate light. I think product UX has drifted too far towards blank monoliths; I know I wouldn't mind a few more blinkenlights :)
      • EpicEng 8y ago
• simion314 8y ago
  I think is possible though I am not an electrical engineer, you can have one LED on if the microphone has power(so you can't be tricked is off) you can have an LED for the networking device, but now considering that the microphone is always on it won't be as useful,
• Keyframe 8y ago
  Just one example, separate memory for storing said data, which when accessed in write mode (current line or write enable low voltage signal for writing to DRAM) activates LED as well. Or, again if DRAM, DQ pins and monitor for voltage high. I'm sure there are a dozen of ways to do it in hardware like that. Maybe someone with more knowledge can chime in. Doing it via microphone/amp wouldn't do it, since you'd still want to use it without LED on (and not software controlled).
• Pinbenterjamin 8y ago
  I guess, in this case 'electricity' would be a the moving part. Just have a closable contact on the mic's power attached to an external switch.