5 ms·

Saw an advertisement for this in a theater some months back. The wife and I turned to each other and said "Hell no." She isn't even that security aware, it's ju

Saw an advertisement for this in a theater some months back. The wife and I turned to each other and said "Hell no." She isn't even that security aware, it's just... why. What is this for? What problem does this solve? Our iPhones do this already without constant surveillance and probably have superior hardware. This feels much to me like Stadia did to Google: It's a company inserting itself into a position it didn't need to be. It's a solution in search of a problem. In the 90's this would've been pretty amazing, but in an era of Smartphones that more or less all support this already with multiple apps, who is this for? Why would you have it? Not even going into the privacy aspects, it's basically a voice-controlled video phone.

deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
toomuchtodo 7y ago
This is for video conferencing users that are not tech literate. This is something I would get for my grandmother, or my wife's grandmother, instead of an iPhone for video conferencing. If it was not offered by Facebook. I would trust Mozilla (perhaps partnered with the EFF) or Apple to offer such a product if they would charge for quality hardware, reliable infra, and long term support. Sell your trust as the feature.
- namdnay 7y ago
  Exactly. The ads themselves are always about the grandparent-grandchildren relationship
- FussyZeus 7y ago
  > This is for video conferencing users that are not tech literate. So why does it increasingly feel like privacy and security are reserved for those who can afford it and/or know how to do it themselves? Why is every poor person who doesn't have the time to learn technology basically hung out to dry in terms of data protection?
  - toomuchtodo 7y ago
    Because regulation is lagging. Call your congressperson (US-centric advice).
marsRoverDev 7y ago
I would not go so far as to assume iPhones do not perform surveillance. What Tim Cook says is one thing, what the national security letter they've received says is another.
- Nextgrid 7y ago
  Surveillance limited to NSL-targeted people as an exception is still better than global surveillance for everyone as part of their business model.
dessant 7y ago
Stadia is a dream come true for Google. Collecting all that personal data at scale about how people interact with virtual environments and how they react to certain situations will give them an unprecedented look into human nature. Ads and product placements is AAA games is also fairly untapped territory, this is why I'm doubtful that Google will give up on this opportunity and shut down Stadia, as some people have predicted.
- jmiskovic 7y ago
  Speaking of product placement in games, I also find it untapped and potentially huge market, not just in AAA games. I mean, if there's a car in the game, why not make it Renault to sponsor development? It seems vastly better than obnoxious ad banners or freemium whale hunting. Is there anything morally problematic with it?
  - disgruntledphd2 7y ago
    Transaction costs, mostly. It's hard to connect developers and advertisers at scale. It's also difficult technically, does every car in a game need to look the same now? Like, I totally think someone could make money from this, but it's unlikely to be as profitable as whale-hunting so it probably won't happen for a while.

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]

toomuchtodo 7y ago

This is for video conferencing users that are not tech literate. This is something I would get for my grandmother, or my wife's grandmother, instead of an iPhone for video conferencing. If it was not offered by Facebook. I would trust Mozilla (perhaps partnered with the EFF) or Apple to offer such a product if they would charge for quality hardware, reliable infra, and long term support. Sell your trust as the feature.

namdnay 7y ago
Exactly. The ads themselves are always about the grandparent-grandchildren relationship
FussyZeus 7y ago
> This is for video conferencing users that are not tech literate. So why does it increasingly feel like privacy and security are reserved for those who can afford it and/or know how to do it themselves? Why is every poor person who doesn't have the time to learn technology basically hung out to dry in terms of data protection?
- toomuchtodo 7y ago
  Because regulation is lagging. Call your congressperson (US-centric advice).

marsRoverDev 7y ago

I would not go so far as to assume iPhones do not perform surveillance. What Tim Cook says is one thing, what the national security letter they've received says is another.

Nextgrid 7y ago
Surveillance limited to NSL-targeted people as an exception is still better than global surveillance for everyone as part of their business model.

dessant 7y ago

Stadia is a dream come true for Google. Collecting all that personal data at scale about how people interact with virtual environments and how they react to certain situations will give them an unprecedented look into human nature. Ads and product placements is AAA games is also fairly untapped territory, this is why I'm doubtful that Google will give up on this opportunity and shut down Stadia, as some people have predicted.

jmiskovic 7y ago
Speaking of product placement in games, I also find it untapped and potentially huge market, not just in AAA games. I mean, if there's a car in the game, why not make it Renault to sponsor development? It seems vastly better than obnoxious ad banners or freemium whale hunting. Is there anything morally problematic with it?
- disgruntledphd2 7y ago
  Transaction costs, mostly. It's hard to connect developers and advertisers at scale. It's also difficult technically, does every car in a game need to look the same now? Like, I totally think someone could make money from this, but it's unlikely to be as profitable as whale-hunting so it probably won't happen for a while.