6 ms·

It's massively insane that people put microphones into their house and willingly stream all conversations to a private 3rd party in exchange for minor convenien

It's massively insane that people put microphones into their house and willingly stream all conversations to a private 3rd party in exchange for minor convenience.

burtonator 8y ago
What's the liability here when I go into someone's house... ? Do I give implied consent? What about states with two party consent?
- samstave 8y ago
  "Please take off your shoes" "Please turn off your Alexa"
  - Pfhreak 8y ago
    "Alexa, please set an alarm for 12 hours from now to remind me that you are always listening"
- shimylining 8y ago
  Won't this be the same with any IoT service? You walk past peoples houses who have Ring, it's recording you.
  - throwawaylalala 8y ago
    Youre walking by in public; no expectation of privacy.
- alx_mcc 8y ago
  http://www.americancriminallawreview.com/files/5114/9515/4188/ALEXA_AND_THIRD_PARTIES_REASONABLE_EXPECTATION_OF_PRIVACY_FINAL.pdf http://www.americancriminallawreview.com/files/5114/9515/418... The third party doctrine may be extended to guests visiting a home, but existing law should adapt to require the visitor’s consent. One party consent laws will no longer be feasible in this context without an exception, as they would completely eradicate any expectation of privacy when visiting another’s home. A more pragmatic approach would be to extend the two party consent laws to owners of recording devices, whereby the duty to disclose that conversations are being recorded would most efficiently be placed on the owner of the recording device. Consent laws must be modified in order to match the reasonable expectation of privacy of guests visiting another’s home. Owners of an Echo device, similar to banking institutions, should have a duty to disclose to their home guests that conversations may be recorded. The duty of disclosure would best be reflected by a uniform application of the two party consent laws.
- spunker540 8y ago
  That’s a good question— maybe people just need to have a disclaimer on their front door that conversations may be monitored!
marcinzm 8y ago
>all conversations I believe Alexa only streams what you say after the trigger word and not all conversations. Assuming you believe Amazon.
- ekianjo 8y ago
  if its technically possible to do it without you knowing then all that is left is how much you trust Amazon with that. Note that Amazon may have to surrender its devices access to three letters agencies for random reasons as well. You have to live with that assumption.
  - marcinzm 8y ago
    Sure. But most people trust corporations with almost all their private correspondences, photos, internet browsing history, shopping behavior, etc. So at that point how much is there to lose by adding everything you say into the mix as well?
    - stuart_marshall 8y ago
      Some companies, notably Google and Amazon, have maintenance of customer trust as a core principle. This seems to be working. Generally, people trust a lot of their private data to these companies and the companies do not abuse it. Microsoft believes in this too, but had to learn the hard way back around 2000 that customer trust matters a lot. Facebook seems to have had a harder time learning this lesson. Perhaps they've learned it now, but it'll take a while before consumers really believe it.
  - JaRail 8y ago
    It's widely understood how the wake-word system works. You can monitor how much data is being uploaded and when. So no, it's not possible to just stream everything you say undetected.
    - pvorb 8y ago
      I believe 99 percent of Alexa users wouldn't notice the increased data usage. If "three letter agencies" carefully choose who they spy on, it might go undetected for a very long time.
megy 8y ago
Yes, but now I don't have to get up to switch my light off.
- pvorb 8y ago
  I don't get this. Yes, people are lazy, but now everybody has to go to the gym, because otherwise they won't even have a little exercise.
  - wkearney99 8y ago
    Look, I know how to make my own candles from tallow (including how to bring down the beast to get the fat). Does that mean using electric lights is lazy? Of course not. I have my hands full cooking. Is asking "Alexa, set a potato timer for 12 minutes" any lazier than stopping my stirring the sauce, wiping my hands, picking up the timer and punching buttons on it to set a timer? I can keep going about my tasks and have the Alexa device help. Likewise, "Alexa, turn on dinner table" or "Alexa, announce 'Everybody get down here, dinner is ready'" These are little conveniences that keep a busy process going smoothly. Could I live without them, sure. But I could live without electric lights and plumbing too. But why would I when they exist and are available at a reasonable expense? Luddites, the lot of you.
  - xnomad 8y ago
    It's not about being lazy, it's a huge help if you are multi-tasking and are time poor ,like most parents are. A pretty normal scenario for me is trying to get the kids out the door, whilst doing their shoelaces you tell Alexa to turn off the tv, turn off lights, tell you the weather forecast and when the next bus is due to arrive out the front.
chillaxtian 8y ago
Cell phones and tablets could already be doing this, it's not unique to the ladies in cans.
- saagarjha 8y ago
  “Ladies in cans” have a power source that allows them to continuously listen and send back audio.
  - maccio92 8y ago
    And so does you phone.. how often do you have your phone on you and it's NOT on?
    - saagarjha 8y ago
      No, it really doesn’t. Phones run on batteries and continuously listening to and streaming audio would cause them to quickly die.
      - pvorb 8y ago
        Maybe they actually do? For example, the 2017 version of the Nokia 3310, according to Nokia, can have calls of ~22h. And that's for a small 1300mAh battery. So it's technically possible to stream audio for a very long time. Maybe smartphones are doing the same in a very low-powered stand by mode?
- chrisco255 8y ago
  Yeah but they're not. It would be obvious from the packet traffic if your phone was constantly streaming everything you said to Google or Apple's servers. It would also be a violation of privacy policy and potentially state law. I think there would be huge backlash if either Google or Apple did this.
  - ColanR 8y ago
    It doesn't need to constantly stream in order to record everything and send it back in periodic batches. Would it also be possible to determine that from the packet traffic? (not intending to be confrontational here)
beatgammit 8y ago
My parents bought us one for Christmas and I politely refused. There's no way I'm letting those into my house without a huge benefit...

It's massively insane that people put microphones into their house and willingly stream all conversations to a private 3rd party in exchange for minor convenience.

burtonator 8y ago

What's the liability here when I go into someone's house... ? Do I give implied consent? What about states with two party consent?

samstave 8y ago
"Please take off your shoes" "Please turn off your Alexa"
- Pfhreak 8y ago
  "Alexa, please set an alarm for 12 hours from now to remind me that you are always listening"
shimylining 8y ago
Won't this be the same with any IoT service? You walk past peoples houses who have Ring, it's recording you.
- throwawaylalala 8y ago
  Youre walking by in public; no expectation of privacy.
alx_mcc 8y ago
http://www.americancriminallawreview.com/files/5114/9515/4188/ALEXA_AND_THIRD_PARTIES_REASONABLE_EXPECTATION_OF_PRIVACY_FINAL.pdf http://www.americancriminallawreview.com/files/5114/9515/418... The third party doctrine may be extended to guests visiting a home, but existing law should adapt to require the visitor’s consent. One party consent laws will no longer be feasible in this context without an exception, as they would completely eradicate any expectation of privacy when visiting another’s home. A more pragmatic approach would be to extend the two party consent laws to owners of recording devices, whereby the duty to disclose that conversations are being recorded would most efficiently be placed on the owner of the recording device. Consent laws must be modified in order to match the reasonable expectation of privacy of guests visiting another’s home. Owners of an Echo device, similar to banking institutions, should have a duty to disclose to their home guests that conversations may be recorded. The duty of disclosure would best be reflected by a uniform application of the two party consent laws.
spunker540 8y ago
That’s a good question— maybe people just need to have a disclaimer on their front door that conversations may be monitored!

marcinzm 8y ago

>all conversations I believe Alexa only streams what you say after the trigger word and not all conversations. Assuming you believe Amazon.

ekianjo 8y ago
if its technically possible to do it without you knowing then all that is left is how much you trust Amazon with that. Note that Amazon may have to surrender its devices access to three letters agencies for random reasons as well. You have to live with that assumption.
- marcinzm 8y ago
  Sure. But most people trust corporations with almost all their private correspondences, photos, internet browsing history, shopping behavior, etc. So at that point how much is there to lose by adding everything you say into the mix as well?
  - stuart_marshall 8y ago
    Some companies, notably Google and Amazon, have maintenance of customer trust as a core principle. This seems to be working. Generally, people trust a lot of their private data to these companies and the companies do not abuse it. Microsoft believes in this too, but had to learn the hard way back around 2000 that customer trust matters a lot. Facebook seems to have had a harder time learning this lesson. Perhaps they've learned it now, but it'll take a while before consumers really believe it.
- JaRail 8y ago
  It's widely understood how the wake-word system works. You can monitor how much data is being uploaded and when. So no, it's not possible to just stream everything you say undetected.
  - pvorb 8y ago
    I believe 99 percent of Alexa users wouldn't notice the increased data usage. If "three letter agencies" carefully choose who they spy on, it might go undetected for a very long time.

megy 8y ago

Yes, but now I don't have to get up to switch my light off.

pvorb 8y ago
I don't get this. Yes, people are lazy, but now everybody has to go to the gym, because otherwise they won't even have a little exercise.
- wkearney99 8y ago
  Look, I know how to make my own candles from tallow (including how to bring down the beast to get the fat). Does that mean using electric lights is lazy? Of course not. I have my hands full cooking. Is asking "Alexa, set a potato timer for 12 minutes" any lazier than stopping my stirring the sauce, wiping my hands, picking up the timer and punching buttons on it to set a timer? I can keep going about my tasks and have the Alexa device help. Likewise, "Alexa, turn on dinner table" or "Alexa, announce 'Everybody get down here, dinner is ready'" These are little conveniences that keep a busy process going smoothly. Could I live without them, sure. But I could live without electric lights and plumbing too. But why would I when they exist and are available at a reasonable expense? Luddites, the lot of you.
- xnomad 8y ago
  It's not about being lazy, it's a huge help if you are multi-tasking and are time poor ,like most parents are. A pretty normal scenario for me is trying to get the kids out the door, whilst doing their shoelaces you tell Alexa to turn off the tv, turn off lights, tell you the weather forecast and when the next bus is due to arrive out the front.

chillaxtian 8y ago

Cell phones and tablets could already be doing this, it's not unique to the ladies in cans.

saagarjha 8y ago
“Ladies in cans” have a power source that allows them to continuously listen and send back audio.
- maccio92 8y ago
  And so does you phone.. how often do you have your phone on you and it's NOT on?
  - saagarjha 8y ago
    No, it really doesn’t. Phones run on batteries and continuously listening to and streaming audio would cause them to quickly die.
    - pvorb 8y ago
      Maybe they actually do? For example, the 2017 version of the Nokia 3310, according to Nokia, can have calls of ~22h. And that's for a small 1300mAh battery. So it's technically possible to stream audio for a very long time. Maybe smartphones are doing the same in a very low-powered stand by mode?
chrisco255 8y ago
Yeah but they're not. It would be obvious from the packet traffic if your phone was constantly streaming everything you said to Google or Apple's servers. It would also be a violation of privacy policy and potentially state law. I think there would be huge backlash if either Google or Apple did this.
- ColanR 8y ago
  It doesn't need to constantly stream in order to record everything and send it back in periodic batches. Would it also be possible to determine that from the packet traffic? (not intending to be confrontational here)

beatgammit 8y ago

My parents bought us one for Christmas and I politely refused. There's no way I'm letting those into my house without a huge benefit...