5 ms·

I get what you are saying but I would say that Amazon does NOT take privacy extremely seriously or this couldn't have happened. Let me be clear that I'm not say

I get what you are saying but I would say that Amazon does NOT take privacy extremely seriously or this couldn't have happened. Let me be clear that I'm not saying they don't care at all or they are conspiring with the NSA. What I mean by the above is that the "call" skill is much different than the "weather" skill. All Alexa has to do is have a confirmation prompt in the "call" skill and this wouldn't have happened. That is what extremely serious looks like. This is exactly the same as the phantom laughter incident from a few months ago. Alexa "heard" someone say 'Alexa laugh' and laughed, but that wasn't the user's intent. It was fixed by moving to 'Sure, I can laugh,' followed by laughter. Voice UI is very hard and still in its infancy but ability for personal harm (physical or emotional) must be considered in these interfaces. Turning off the lights may not need confirmation but unlocking the doors or turning off the alarm probably should. Sending recordings or answering calls or even calling people should require more hoops or at least allow the user to control the risk/reward.

cwkoss 8y ago
> they are conspiring with the NSA There is absolutely no reason to believe they are not conspiring with the NSA. They have a huge deal with the CIA, plausible some of these funds are for surveillance capabilities. They would not (and likely would be legally prohibited from) disclosing any relationship they have. https://venturebeat.com/2014/03/18/snowden-slams-amazon-for-leaking-customer-data-to-the-nsa/ https://venturebeat.com/2014/03/18/snowden-slams-amazon-for-... https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2014/07/the-details-about-the-cias-deal-with-amazon/374632/ https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2014/07/the-d...
- smsm42 8y ago
  > There is absolutely no reason to believe they are not conspiring with the NSA. Or, more likely, being made an offer they can not refuse by the NSA. And the rank-in-file engineers may not even know it's happening, all it takes is inserting some diverting code into the pipeline and calling it "QA monitoring" or something. Couple of people in the whole org would know that somebody from some IP connects and downloads these "QA" data periodically, all the rest would be completely ignorant and indignant at the thought. Don't see anything preventing this from happening at Amazon - or anywhere else.
- mikec3010 8y ago
  ~~conspiring with~~ accepted an "offer" they couldn't refuse.
jasonlotito 8y ago
> I get what you are saying but I would say that Amazon does NOT take privacy extremely seriously or this couldn't have happened. Apple shared personal photos of myself onto the internet without my permission. I could not delete it without getting support to assist, and they could not provide me with a reason why this happened. Would you say that Apple does not take privacy seriously?
- snarf21 8y ago
  I would need you to explain how that happened. The issue from the article is systemic. Everyone could easily accidentally be recorded and share that with random people
amzn_engineer1 8y ago
I think you accurately identify the issue with this situation / skill; voice triggers need to weigh convenience (how easy should it be to activate this skill) against it's permissions or potential (how can this skill affect a customer). In this case, I think this was not done properly. This does not mean Amazon does not take privacy seriously. It is a company of small teams with very few layers of management between an engineer and business decision. The error in judgement of one team does not reflect on all of Amazon. As you say, Voice UI is still in its infancy and not lacking growing pains. However, because Amazon does take privacy very seriously, after this incident, I'm certain there will be actions taken internally to ensure teams properly weigh the gravity of a skill with its voice trigger (or adjustments made if there is already an existing policy). My own thoughts, not Amazon's.

cwkoss 8y ago

> they are conspiring with the NSA There is absolutely no reason to believe they are not conspiring with the NSA. They have a huge deal with the CIA, plausible some of these funds are for surveillance capabilities. They would not (and likely would be legally prohibited from) disclosing any relationship they have. https://venturebeat.com/2014/03/18/snowden-slams-amazon-for-leaking-customer-data-to-the-nsa/ https://venturebeat.com/2014/03/18/snowden-slams-amazon-for-... https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2014/07/the-details-about-the-cias-deal-with-amazon/374632/ https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2014/07/the-d...

smsm42 8y ago
> There is absolutely no reason to believe they are not conspiring with the NSA. Or, more likely, being made an offer they can not refuse by the NSA. And the rank-in-file engineers may not even know it's happening, all it takes is inserting some diverting code into the pipeline and calling it "QA monitoring" or something. Couple of people in the whole org would know that somebody from some IP connects and downloads these "QA" data periodically, all the rest would be completely ignorant and indignant at the thought. Don't see anything preventing this from happening at Amazon - or anywhere else.
mikec3010 8y ago
~~conspiring with~~ accepted an "offer" they couldn't refuse.

jasonlotito 8y ago

> I get what you are saying but I would say that Amazon does NOT take privacy extremely seriously or this couldn't have happened. Apple shared personal photos of myself onto the internet without my permission. I could not delete it without getting support to assist, and they could not provide me with a reason why this happened. Would you say that Apple does not take privacy seriously?

snarf21 8y ago
I would need you to explain how that happened. The issue from the article is systemic. Everyone could easily accidentally be recorded and share that with random people

amzn_engineer1 8y ago

I think you accurately identify the issue with this situation / skill; voice triggers need to weigh convenience (how easy should it be to activate this skill) against it's permissions or potential (how can this skill affect a customer). In this case, I think this was not done properly. This does not mean Amazon does not take privacy seriously. It is a company of small teams with very few layers of management between an engineer and business decision. The error in judgement of one team does not reflect on all of Amazon. As you say, Voice UI is still in its infancy and not lacking growing pains. However, because Amazon does take privacy very seriously, after this incident, I'm certain there will be actions taken internally to ensure teams properly weigh the gravity of a skill with its voice trigger (or adjustments made if there is already an existing policy). My own thoughts, not Amazon's.