3 ms·

Much of the problem stems not only from the limited understanding capability of voice assistant devices, but also from the lack of trust we have in the big tech

Much of the problem stems not only from the limited understanding capability of voice assistant devices, but also from the lack of trust we have in the big tech vendors backing them. I have multiple voice assistant devices, a few from Amazon, and I not only disabled but unplugged them once I heard about Amazon's efforts to share my bandwidth without my consent. Limited utility plus bad privacy practices aren't a compelling combination. I have a Google Home assistant and I only use it to play music since it has fairly decent sound quality. My Amazon echo and show devices will stay unplugged.

rektide 5y ago
i ran the max rate lora numbers, for very close by devices, & i dont fully remember but i think it was like 250MB a month. again assuming 100% channel utilization at max rate. i really am very happy to find fault, to elaborate misuse. but the reaction to amazon using a very little bit of bandwidth (usually under 50MB i expect) feels entirely emotional, entirely reactionary. in any technical sense we can measure it is for all intensive purposes going to be irrelevant. this feels like a social dilemna. we want to activate ourselves against amazon. want to tear down the big, the seeming man. but this feels petty & small. that we so readily make a stand here says that we arent really discerning or tasteful or making sensible assessments & rationalizations & choices. we're acting in aggressively zero sum hostile premises, & causing a stir over that which is nothing. generally i think you're larger point about mistrust is dead on. these systems are black boxes, running in far off data centers. this is anti-personal computing, unobservable by the primary stakeholder, & it's a fucking abominable form of computing that i think more & more people realize has no respect for them, that treats them like end users, not masters of their home & it's systems.
- rexreed 5y ago
  The amount of bandwidth being used isn't the concern. It's the lack of control and consent over what is being transmitted. How would you feel if the car you bought granted someone the right to come over once a month just to open your car doors and see what's in your glove compartment? Oh, it's just once a month and they're not doing anything, just rifling through your glove box. This is how I feel about the sharing of Echo bandwidth. It has nothing to do with the "big guy". If some no-name startup sold me software or a device and told me they're going to use my bandwidth for whatever reasons, I'd be just as concerned. I use plenty of Amazon on a day to day basis, no need to "tear down the man". But these Echo and Show devices will stay turned off.
  - rektide 5y ago
    it's acting as a general gateway for semi-public use. it's not transmitting any of your own data unless you tell the device to send it. but other people who do want to keep in contact with their devices can send a couple bytes every now & again. claiming that this is like giving access to your car to a stranger is ridiculous. i cant see the fauntest shred of truth to this FUD.

rektide 5y ago

i ran the max rate lora numbers, for very close by devices, & i dont fully remember but i think it was like 250MB a month. again assuming 100% channel utilization at max rate. i really am very happy to find fault, to elaborate misuse. but the reaction to amazon using a very little bit of bandwidth (usually under 50MB i expect) feels entirely emotional, entirely reactionary. in any technical sense we can measure it is for all intensive purposes going to be irrelevant. this feels like a social dilemna. we want to activate ourselves against amazon. want to tear down the big, the seeming man. but this feels petty & small. that we so readily make a stand here says that we arent really discerning or tasteful or making sensible assessments & rationalizations & choices. we're acting in aggressively zero sum hostile premises, & causing a stir over that which is nothing. generally i think you're larger point about mistrust is dead on. these systems are black boxes, running in far off data centers. this is anti-personal computing, unobservable by the primary stakeholder, & it's a fucking abominable form of computing that i think more & more people realize has no respect for them, that treats them like end users, not masters of their home & it's systems.

rexreed 5y ago
The amount of bandwidth being used isn't the concern. It's the lack of control and consent over what is being transmitted. How would you feel if the car you bought granted someone the right to come over once a month just to open your car doors and see what's in your glove compartment? Oh, it's just once a month and they're not doing anything, just rifling through your glove box. This is how I feel about the sharing of Echo bandwidth. It has nothing to do with the "big guy". If some no-name startup sold me software or a device and told me they're going to use my bandwidth for whatever reasons, I'd be just as concerned. I use plenty of Amazon on a day to day basis, no need to "tear down the man". But these Echo and Show devices will stay turned off.
- rektide 5y ago
  it's acting as a general gateway for semi-public use. it's not transmitting any of your own data unless you tell the device to send it. but other people who do want to keep in contact with their devices can send a couple bytes every now & again. claiming that this is like giving access to your car to a stranger is ridiculous. i cant see the fauntest shred of truth to this FUD.