5 ms·

I think yours is an important question that few people realize which is; these companies are legally required to tell you when they are listening to you, or eve

I think yours is an important question that few people realize which is; these companies are legally required to tell you when they are listening to you, or even potentially listening to you. Google "accidentally" forgot to tell people that they included a mic in those devices. That's still illegal.

milkthefat 8y ago
What happens if i created a device that has multiple speakers and through a software update I make one an (albeit)poor quality mic? Do I need to tell you before hand that this was possible? Are they still considered speakers?
- code_duck 8y ago
  Obviously that change would be made in order to use the new microphone capability, and of course that would require informing consumers when you’re using the mic and why.
- ineedasername 8y ago
  Uh, yes? I don't think it's an open question that product updates should detail the updates made. And since recording someone in any way without their knowledge is illegal in many contexts, that would go double for something like you describe.
  - foobarian 8y ago
    The point is that there are a million devices with speakers and we don't expect their manufacturers to disclose that it is possible to record us with them. As long as they are not actually doing it I don't see the big deal with the dormant microphone either.
    - ineedasername 8y ago
      They disclose the speaker. And I'm willing to bet the vast majority aren't wired to be an input device. Your comparison is a false equivalency.
propogandist 8y ago
Google admitted to congress they're constantly tracking people via their devices >Hawley pointed out on Tuesday that a user's location is sent to Google hundreds of times a day, even when the phone is not in use. In fact, Hawley said, a user's location is tracked "every four minutes, or 14 times an hour, roughly 340 times during a 24-hour period," even when the phone is not in use. >DeVries confessed that "location information is absolutely core to making a mobile phone work the way that you want it to work." He said that Google has an "optional service" called Location History that is opt-in and "can collect location over time when people turn that on." >"But Google collects geolocation data even if Location History is turned off, correct?" Hawley pressed. >"Yes, senator, it can in order to operate other services—" This should be illegal and was admitted to congress -- justifying it with BS excuses -- but virtually no major media outlet is covering this. https://pjmedia.com/trending/google-tracks-you-even-when-location-is-turned-off-google-exec-finally-admits-to-congress/ https://pjmedia.com/trending/google-tracks-you-even-when-loc... (one of 3 articles I found about this)
- hedora 8y ago
  This has been well-known for a while, so the story itself isn’t news. (The fact that congress called them in to testify is news, since it means maybe some politicians are going to make noises about how unacceptable this is, or perhaps even introduce a bill.)
  - propogandist 8y ago
    It's not new news to me, but having a Google exec publically admit should be bigger news, in my opinion. In the testimony [0] he also positions Google's location service as something that's required for the phone to function and even make calls, which is untrue. Being a lawyer and apparently on Google's privacy counsel for a decade this may've been a disclosure on how deep the data-mining goes. These are the sort of details that should be pulled out and scrutinized by the media. Unfortunately most of these news publications rely on things like Google's YT + Adsense for content distribution and revenue, so they may not want to anger their overlords. I also doubt anything will come out of this hearing -- people don't seem to care about privacy and they want convenience. Although this senator understands the privacy concerns, most of his peers are clueless. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PwyuCtbK3qw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PwyuCtbK3qw

milkthefat 8y ago

What happens if i created a device that has multiple speakers and through a software update I make one an (albeit)poor quality mic? Do I need to tell you before hand that this was possible? Are they still considered speakers?

code_duck 8y ago
Obviously that change would be made in order to use the new microphone capability, and of course that would require informing consumers when you’re using the mic and why.
ineedasername 8y ago
Uh, yes? I don't think it's an open question that product updates should detail the updates made. And since recording someone in any way without their knowledge is illegal in many contexts, that would go double for something like you describe.
- foobarian 8y ago
  The point is that there are a million devices with speakers and we don't expect their manufacturers to disclose that it is possible to record us with them. As long as they are not actually doing it I don't see the big deal with the dormant microphone either.
  - ineedasername 8y ago
    They disclose the speaker. And I'm willing to bet the vast majority aren't wired to be an input device. Your comparison is a false equivalency.

propogandist 8y ago

Google admitted to congress they're constantly tracking people via their devices >Hawley pointed out on Tuesday that a user's location is sent to Google hundreds of times a day, even when the phone is not in use. In fact, Hawley said, a user's location is tracked "every four minutes, or 14 times an hour, roughly 340 times during a 24-hour period," even when the phone is not in use. >DeVries confessed that "location information is absolutely core to making a mobile phone work the way that you want it to work." He said that Google has an "optional service" called Location History that is opt-in and "can collect location over time when people turn that on." >"But Google collects geolocation data even if Location History is turned off, correct?" Hawley pressed. >"Yes, senator, it can in order to operate other services—" This should be illegal and was admitted to congress -- justifying it with BS excuses -- but virtually no major media outlet is covering this. https://pjmedia.com/trending/google-tracks-you-even-when-location-is-turned-off-google-exec-finally-admits-to-congress/ https://pjmedia.com/trending/google-tracks-you-even-when-loc... (one of 3 articles I found about this)

hedora 8y ago
This has been well-known for a while, so the story itself isn’t news. (The fact that congress called them in to testify is news, since it means maybe some politicians are going to make noises about how unacceptable this is, or perhaps even introduce a bill.)
- propogandist 8y ago
  It's not new news to me, but having a Google exec publically admit should be bigger news, in my opinion. In the testimony [0] he also positions Google's location service as something that's required for the phone to function and even make calls, which is untrue. Being a lawyer and apparently on Google's privacy counsel for a decade this may've been a disclosure on how deep the data-mining goes. These are the sort of details that should be pulled out and scrutinized by the media. Unfortunately most of these news publications rely on things like Google's YT + Adsense for content distribution and revenue, so they may not want to anger their overlords. I also doubt anything will come out of this hearing -- people don't seem to care about privacy and they want convenience. Although this senator understands the privacy concerns, most of his peers are clueless. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PwyuCtbK3qw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PwyuCtbK3qw