5 ms·

Adults are presumed to able to give informed consent, given a clear explanation of how that data will be used.

crankylinuxuser 7y ago
I saw an Echo Dot on sale at Krogers (supermarket, midwest US) for $20 today. No, I won't install any sort of 1984-level spy machines in or around my house. But this is easily within 'mow a lawn' budget for a kid. If I was younger, I might have considered it for 'cool' factor. But there's no restriction at Kroger like there is for alcohol(21) or cigarettes(18) or cold pills(18). A 10 year old could buy it and leave the store... And yet, this $20 purchase is more dangerous long-term than 3 packs of cigarettes, a bottle of whiskey, or 2 boxes of cold pills. The data is being used in unknown and likely very unethical ways. There's quite a few questions that could easily cause ramifications for decades down the line. Examples are: 1. Asking about drugs 2. Asking about child abuse 3. Talking about suicide 4. Expressing sentiment that is now or will be persecuted 5. Private conversations that were never meant heard by a 3rd party That data will always be attributed to them, no matter how they try to shed from it. Who would Amazon 'share' it with? We have no clue; European rules would indicate they didn't have the rights to sell/share to begin with, but we US citizens have no such rights. And for that 10-15 year old, they could very well have the rest of their life to deal with that fallout. Damn, I'm glad that my childhood didn't have cell phones, or all this spytech, or ubiquitous always-on-always-snooping computer platforms. I truly can't relate to what kids go through these days, with in-person AND online presence, being on the edge of a gen-x'er and millenial.
- scarejunba 7y ago
  It is literally not more dangerous than three packs of ciggies. Are you kidding me? That is prima facie ludicrous and you have to present pretty strong evidence of that. My childhood had append-only bulletin boards and I put a lot of stuff in there that I am never going to delete. Guess what? I'm fine. And have been for twenty years. On the other hand, getting off cigarettes changed my fucking life. Jesus Christ. "Worse than 3 packs of cigarettes."
  - crankylinuxuser 7y ago
    Addicted and 3 packs are very different things. I would agree by far that being addicted to nicotine and smoking cigarettes is terrifically deleterious. But I said only 3 packs. Not 4, not 5, or more. And with https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1117323/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1117323/ , 3 packs is 60 cigs at a total of "11 hours" shortened lifespan. > "My childhood had append-only bulletin boards and I put a lot of stuff in there that I am never going to delete. Guess what? I'm fine. And have been for twenty years." How many of those had geospacial data, telemetry, chat logs, real names policy, email logs, and more attributed to you? Kids these days do have all of that. We never did.
    - scarejunba 7y ago
      Perhaps if you'll help me understand what 'dangerous' means to you here. I will wager⁰ $1000 that if there were two kids of equivalent lives and you give one an Echo and the other 3 packs of cigarettes, boy 2 will die earlier, have a lower quality of life throughout, and have a higher likelihood of drug abuse. Geospatial data, telemetry, chat logs, real names, email logs (we had that one, it's all our mailing list stuff). That is nothing in the face of burning tar in your lungs. I will wager actual money down on this. If you're in SF, I will send someone to meet you or your equivalent representative, with a contract you may discuss with him. 0: In fact, the $1k is intentionally low to encourage you to participate. I will do $10k. I am very convinced of my thesis: introduction to cigarettes is far more dangerous than introduction to voice assistants and will continue to be far more dangerous for the remainder of the century.
      - JumpCrisscross 7y ago
        > I will wager actual money down on this And I’d join you! But that is insufficient to dismiss OP’s claim as prima facie invalid. Mental health risks are real. And the chances of getting addicted to nicotine from a couple packs are small enough so as to be, prima facie, comparable to the risks of long-term mental health issues from the use of voice assistants. We don’t have the data. OP’s claim and implied question are valid.
- astura 7y ago
  >this $20 purchase is more dangerous long-term than 3 packs of cigarettes, a bottle of whiskey, or 2 boxes of cold pills. What a ridiculously silly thing to say. It's such an absurd statement that I don't even need to elaborate.
  - crankylinuxuser 7y ago
    No. I'm just forward enough thinking to see it. Data can be extracted and saved for a lifetime, consent or not. And we just entered this always-on digital age around 2012-2013. We know the dangers of using tobacco. We know the dangers of alcohol. And we know the dangers of cold pills (even if they aren't normally abused). We have no ideas about the longterm dangers of massive data collections. And I would posit that what we currently know about the abuses of data, that it is more dangerous than the aforementioned things. Most of what we have to look forward to is fiction books and tv shows and movies.
  - JumpCrisscross 7y ago
    > What a ridiculously silly thing to say Why? The actuarial effects of 3 packs of cigarettes and a bottle of whiskey are virtually negligible. (No clue with cold pills.) The damage is in at the edge (addiction and overdose). The downsides of voice assistants are similar (negligibly bad on average and potentially deadly on the edge cases.) Put simply, the mental health risks with voice assistants (with respect to a developing mind) is analogous to the health risks from cigarette use. And just like a bottle of whiskey could be someone’s last, voice assistants could e.g. disclose a teenager’s sexual orientation to a violently-inclined and medievally-minded parent.

I saw an Echo Dot on sale at Krogers (supermarket, midwest US) for $20 today. No, I won't install any sort of 1984-level spy machines in or around my house. But this is easily within 'mow a lawn' budget for a kid. If I was younger, I might have considered it for 'cool' factor. But there's no restriction at Kroger like there is for alcohol(21) or cigarettes(18) or cold pills(18). A 10 year old could buy it and leave the store... And yet, this $20 purchase is more dangerous long-term than 3 packs of cigarettes, a bottle of whiskey, or 2 boxes of cold pills. The data is being used in unknown and likely very unethical ways. There's quite a few questions that could easily cause ramifications for decades down the line. Examples are: 1. Asking about drugs 2. Asking about child abuse 3. Talking about suicide 4. Expressing sentiment that is now or will be persecuted 5. Private conversations that were never meant heard by a 3rd party That data will always be attributed to them, no matter how they try to shed from it. Who would Amazon 'share' it with? We have no clue; European rules would indicate they didn't have the rights to sell/share to begin with, but we US citizens have no such rights. And for that 10-15 year old, they could very well have the rest of their life to deal with that fallout. Damn, I'm glad that my childhood didn't have cell phones, or all this spytech, or ubiquitous always-on-always-snooping computer platforms. I truly can't relate to what kids go through these days, with in-person AND online presence, being on the edge of a gen-x'er and millenial.

scarejunba 7y ago
It is literally not more dangerous than three packs of ciggies. Are you kidding me? That is prima facie ludicrous and you have to present pretty strong evidence of that. My childhood had append-only bulletin boards and I put a lot of stuff in there that I am never going to delete. Guess what? I'm fine. And have been for twenty years. On the other hand, getting off cigarettes changed my fucking life. Jesus Christ. "Worse than 3 packs of cigarettes."
- crankylinuxuser 7y ago
  Addicted and 3 packs are very different things. I would agree by far that being addicted to nicotine and smoking cigarettes is terrifically deleterious. But I said only 3 packs. Not 4, not 5, or more. And with https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1117323/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1117323/ , 3 packs is 60 cigs at a total of "11 hours" shortened lifespan. > "My childhood had append-only bulletin boards and I put a lot of stuff in there that I am never going to delete. Guess what? I'm fine. And have been for twenty years." How many of those had geospacial data, telemetry, chat logs, real names policy, email logs, and more attributed to you? Kids these days do have all of that. We never did.
  - scarejunba 7y ago
    Perhaps if you'll help me understand what 'dangerous' means to you here. I will wager⁰ $1000 that if there were two kids of equivalent lives and you give one an Echo and the other 3 packs of cigarettes, boy 2 will die earlier, have a lower quality of life throughout, and have a higher likelihood of drug abuse. Geospatial data, telemetry, chat logs, real names, email logs (we had that one, it's all our mailing list stuff). That is nothing in the face of burning tar in your lungs. I will wager actual money down on this. If you're in SF, I will send someone to meet you or your equivalent representative, with a contract you may discuss with him. 0: In fact, the $1k is intentionally low to encourage you to participate. I will do $10k. I am very convinced of my thesis: introduction to cigarettes is far more dangerous than introduction to voice assistants and will continue to be far more dangerous for the remainder of the century.
    - JumpCrisscross 7y ago
      > I will wager actual money down on this And I’d join you! But that is insufficient to dismiss OP’s claim as prima facie invalid. Mental health risks are real. And the chances of getting addicted to nicotine from a couple packs are small enough so as to be, prima facie, comparable to the risks of long-term mental health issues from the use of voice assistants. We don’t have the data. OP’s claim and implied question are valid.
astura 7y ago
>this $20 purchase is more dangerous long-term than 3 packs of cigarettes, a bottle of whiskey, or 2 boxes of cold pills. What a ridiculously silly thing to say. It's such an absurd statement that I don't even need to elaborate.
- crankylinuxuser 7y ago
  No. I'm just forward enough thinking to see it. Data can be extracted and saved for a lifetime, consent or not. And we just entered this always-on digital age around 2012-2013. We know the dangers of using tobacco. We know the dangers of alcohol. And we know the dangers of cold pills (even if they aren't normally abused). We have no ideas about the longterm dangers of massive data collections. And I would posit that what we currently know about the abuses of data, that it is more dangerous than the aforementioned things. Most of what we have to look forward to is fiction books and tv shows and movies.
- JumpCrisscross 7y ago
  > What a ridiculously silly thing to say Why? The actuarial effects of 3 packs of cigarettes and a bottle of whiskey are virtually negligible. (No clue with cold pills.) The damage is in at the edge (addiction and overdose). The downsides of voice assistants are similar (negligibly bad on average and potentially deadly on the edge cases.) Put simply, the mental health risks with voice assistants (with respect to a developing mind) is analogous to the health risks from cigarette use. And just like a bottle of whiskey could be someone’s last, voice assistants could e.g. disclose a teenager’s sexual orientation to a violently-inclined and medievally-minded parent.