11 ms·
Silicon Valley Is Listening to Your Most Intimate Moments
- willis936 7y agoCan I get a pastebin link?
- krackers 7y agoI believe this is the same article, non-paywalled: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2019-12-11/silicon-valley-got-millions-to-let-siri-and-alexa-listen-in https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2019-12-11/silicon-v...
- 3xblah 7y agocurl https://www.bloombergquint.com/amp/bq-blue-exclusive/silicon-valley-got-millions-to-let-siri-and-alexa-listen-in |sed -n 'N;/story-element-text">/p' > a.htm firefox a.htm Replace "firefox" with any browser that can process basic HTML. No Javascript or CSS needed.
- mirimir 7y agoThank you !!! Nice hack.
- markwakeford 7y agoYou can also just disable javascript for the website.
- AdrienLemaire 7y agoThis is what you get if you block javascript for www.bloombergquint.com: https://i.imgur.com/LrPYVmq.png https://i.imgur.com/LrPYVmq.png
- 3xblah 7y agoUnfortunately, the popular graphical browsers AFAIK do not allow the user to disable CSS. Other news sites that use AMP, such as WSJ, use CSS as well as Javascript to annoy the user. Disabling Javascript is not enough. It is possible to remove the offensive CSS from a page through the browser's developer console, developer tools, etc. but at that point we may as well use a browser extension. Here is a filter for WSJ. sed -n '/<article/,/<\/article/{/./{/<h1/,/<\/h1>/p;};/<title>/,/<\/title>/p;/./{/<p>[^<]*/,/<\/p>/p;};}' a.htm
- shadowprofile77 7y agoNot mine. For those stupid or simply indifferent enough to have one of these spying, revolting, idiotically vapid machines in their home and always on, possibly. Better to not even keep a cell phone nearby for really private moments and conversations.
- rickncliff 7y agoIt's unfortunate that this almarmist technophobic slant is considered worthy journalism.
- chillwaves 7y agoIf the community did not value this viewpoint, you would not see it on the front page. Perhaps your disdain is misdirected.
- mirimir 7y agoIf they did the voice recognition locally, there wouldn't be a privacy issue. And that would arguably be far cooler technology.
- tomc1985 7y agoExactly. Cloud-powered voice assistants are thoroughly uninteresting and a huge privacy concern. Local, 100% in-device processing should be the future and if that were the case this link would indeed be "alarmist"
- cryptozeus 7y agoI just sold my google home mini for $10...never trusting these devices inside my home anymore
- tekstar 7y agoWhat changed? As in, what made you think they were okay and then realize they were not?
- blaser-waffle 7y agoLike, did parent think "well, google has a great reputation at avoiding data mining, so let's go with them!"
- kirillzubovsky 7y agoIf we are to get technical, Silicon Valley is not listening to your secret, workers in the rest of the country are.
- jonny_eh 7y agoAnd those workers don't know you.
- manishsharan 7y agoRemember when you could buy bluetooth speakers that you could listen to without the speaker listening to you ? Nowadays everyone of my friends has a alexa or google speakers which sound shitty compared to real speakers and they spy on our conversations. For what ? to turn the fucking lights on or play a tune on demand? those lazy dumbasses cant be bothered to get off their butt to turn the lights on ? If only I had privacy conscious friends.
- LeftHandPath 7y agoMy dad has his whole house wired up with echo dots in every room, voice-activated lights, voice-control TV, and those shitty $100 security cameras in every room. I've tried to explain why he doesn't need them. His response (about the security cameras) is always, "If there's ever a break in, I'll be glad I have them." The fact that actually using a light switch sets in motion a 20-minute repair via iPad doesn't seem to bother him. He doesn't view the wiretaps as a problem. He (with my mother's help) recently bought a wifi-enabled fridge and kitchen sink. I love my parents to death, but it's ridiculous. I'm to the point where I usually leave my phone in the next room over when I'm not using it (and please check me in at a psych ward if I ever buy a smart-watch with a cellular connection and an omni-directional microphone). Its beneficial for clarity of thought / lack of distraction as well as for privacy. Connectivity for connectivity's sake will be the death of freedom.
- paggle 7y agoWhat does a WiFi kitchen sink do?
- LeftHandPath 7y agoIt's as useless as it sounds. This isn't the one they have, but it's similar: https://www.amazon.com/Trinsic-Pull-Down-Activated-Technology-9159TV-DST/dp/B07CXF215K https://www.amazon.com/Trinsic-Pull-Down-Activated-Technolog...
- 7y ago
- drewcon 7y agoSerious question. Why is Alexa on an Echo different than Siri on a phone? Seems like there is clear outrage about “surveillance economy listening devices” (from some members of this community) when they’re in your kitchen but not your pocket? Why is that different?
- aaronbrethorst 7y agoAmazon vs. Apple
- im3w1l 7y agoYou can disable the assistant on the phone.
- mirimir 7y agoIt's not that different. Especially for third parties, who don't control the device. When in others' homes, I typically ask whether there are listening devices. And if so, I request that they be disconnected. And if the host declines, I may leave -- or at least say nothing consequential. My wife's phone is on 24/7 and almost always within easy reach. So I never say anything consequential, unless it's been moved to the utility closet. Lots of fan noise there. Edit: From https://blog.cyberwar.nl/2016/02/some-elements-of-intelligence-work-73-rules-of-spycraft-allen-dulles-1960s/ https://blog.cyberwar.nl/2016/02/some-elements-of-intelligen... > 17. The greatest material curse to the profession, despite all its advantages, is undoubtedly the telephone. It is a constant source of temptation to slackness. And even if you do not use it carelessly yourself, the other fellow, very often will, so in any case, warn him. Always act on the principle that every conversation is listened to, that a call may always give the enemy a line. Naturally, always unplug during confidential conversations. Even better is it to have no phone in your room, or else have it in a box or cupboard.
- squidgy 7y agoInteresting that in a marketplace where seemingly all home speakers on offer have voice assist, Sonos' newest small speaker, the Sonos One SL, is described as "Microphone-free".
- sfRattan 7y agoI chuckle at a 'reassurance' like that one. Mechanically, a speaker is a poorly optimized microphone and a microphone is a poorly optimized speaker.[1] I don't doubt there are people working for most major governments' intelligence departments who can use malicious software to facilitate listening through a computer connected speaker when surveilling a target (even if that speaker doesn't have an integrated microphone, in a very literal sense it is a microphone). [1] https://security.stackexchange.com/questions/154343/can-a-speaker-be-used-as-a-microphone https://security.stackexchange.com/questions/154343/can-a-sp... Edit: precision of language
- mojuba 7y agoLet alone back in the day landline phones were used as wiretapping devices, even when you are not speaking on the phone and it's on hook. The telephony standard was designed with this in mind, i.e. the possibility to turn any phone on-hook or off-hook to a listening device.
- IshKebab 7y agoThis is paranoid nonsense. Sure a speaker can be used as a very bad microphone. But only if you plug it into a microphone input! Are government agents going to break into your house and rewire your smart speaker? Of course not.
- sfRattan 7y agoThe words I wrote were computer connected speaker. So, yes, plugged-into-a-computer is what I was talking about. Thanks for the further reassurance that government agents won't break into my home, but that wasn't what I was suggesting. It's a non sequitur and a straw man. Government agenties are more likely to, for example, expand on publicly available research that uses malicious software and audio I/O built into (or connected to) computers to remotely access air gapped computers.[1] And, if it's possible to write a network protocol that runs over low quality mics and speakers up to 65ft apart, it doesn't sound unreasonable to similarly hack up audio drivers such that a speaker can function as a microphone for the purposes of espionage, without anyone breaking down your door or rewiring anything. Spies don't have to convince a jury with the intelligence/evidence they gather, so low quality can often be good enough. Of course, an attempt to aggregate the compromising of countless bespoke proprietary audio drivers and operating system versions doesn't scale at all... Which is why I used the wording when surveilling a target and not when surveilling speakers everywhere. That latter claim would indeed be paranoid nonsense. Which is why I didn't make it. As in, a government is surveilling a particular person or building, has compromised this a nearby computer remotely, but the computer has no microphone. If there's a connected speaker (or even an integrated speaker on the motherboard), deliver a payload that messes with the audio drivers to see what you can hear using the speaker. [1] http://www.jocm.us/uploadfile/2013/1125/20131125103803901.pdf http://www.jocm.us/uploadfile/2013/1125/20131125103803901.pd...
- louis_pasteur 7y ago"I have nothing to hide wizo geeko, here take this middle finger" is the answer we get when we try to inform people about privacy. Even large scale privacy breaches of sensitive information have had no impact on people's privacy awareness.
- steveeq1 7y agoWhenever they say that, ask them how much money they made last year. When they say "no" ask, "why, do you have anything to hide?".
- jedberg 7y agoI guess having done AI and security for 20 years means none of this fazes me. Of course they record what you say, and of course a human is listening to it. How else would they train their models? I also believe Amazon when they say that it isn't recording unless the blue light is on, and that only comes on when it thinks you said "Alexa". I mute the device when I'm having a private conversation. If it activates otherwise, I'm pretty aware of that. I guess it just doesn't really bother me. I have a pretty good idea of what it's recording.
- GhettoMaestro 7y agoOmg stop applying rationality to the conversation you devil!
- PavlovsCat 7y agoHaving paid attention for decades to people who have been paying attention for way longer than that, these reactions neither surprise nor faze me, either. It's all been thoroughly weighed and found too light before 99.9% of us were even born. > Yet another circumstance must be mentioned which proves favorable for the Nazis and their immensely powerful apparatus of oppression: the development of modern technology gives the rulers, as has long been insufficiently understood, an advantage over the ruled. The more effective the weapons become and the less you can protect yourself against them, the more the armed is superior to the unarmed. The Bastille could not be successfully stormed in the age of airplanes and tear gas. Rifles equipped with rifles have no chance against motorized police forces; it makes no sense to build barricades against a government that has tanks. And in the event of a revolution, it is not only weapons development that favors those in power, the state over the individual: modern technical development and the associated sophisticated organization work in the same direction. Traffic has led to the countries becoming small and easy to monitor. How many hiding places there were in a country a hundred years ago! At that time, every power hit natural barriers! Today there is no loophole and no hideout for the rebel anymore. Even the thoughts that are able to penetrate the walls have become "controllable" because they are tied to the mass distribution of news, to radio, film and the press. How long will it take before every house has its own microphone and every private word, like every telephone call today, can be heard? The ant state is at hand. It may not be a coincidence that states like Germany and Russia have elevated technology to the status of a religion. Conversely, this development of modern technology makes the preservation of freedom a human task that is more urgent than ever. -- Sebastian Haffner, "Germany: Jekyll & Hyde (1939 - Deutschland von innen betrachtet)" > I cannot tell why the spokesmen I have cited want the developments I forecast to become true. Some of them have told me that they work on them for the morally bankrupt reason that "If we don't do it, someone else will." They fear that evil people will develop superintelligent machines and use them to oppress mankind, and that the only defense against these enemy machines will be superintelligent machines controlled by us, that is, by well-intentioned people. Others reveal that they have abdicated their autonomy by appealing to the "principle" of technological inevitability. But, finally, all I can say with assurance is that these people are not stupid. All the rest is mystery. -- Joseph Weizenbaum
- blackflame 7y agoHA! Jokes on them! I don’t have any! Wait...
- aSplash0fDerp 7y agoFor those old enough to have heard stories about party line telephone usage, this appears to be the modern version. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Party_line_(telephony) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Party_line_(telephony) As someone mentioned, the money is in localizing many of the cloud services.. Or the modern version of shrink-wrap software, which removes the whole "you're the product" profit motive. For the casual observer, the ongoing drama of merging your wallet, personal diary, communications, plus other activities and oozing metadata 24/7 is just too tempting for strangers. All of that money for nothing is high stakes nowadays. Caveat emptor...