6 ms·

The product is Alexa the voice assistant, not the tiny speaker+microphone. Amazon makes this product. When the child spoke to the device, Alexa made a deliber

The product is Alexa the voice assistant, not the tiny speaker+microphone. Amazon makes this product. When the child spoke to the device, Alexa made a deliberate decision to look up a challenge on the internet (presumably, from a website it deems as safe). In doing so, Amazon endorses the challenge. The product put a child’s in life in danger. This is not very complicated.

dr_dshiv 5y ago
>When the child spoke to the device, Alexa made a deliberate decision to look up a challenge on the internet I don't think that's fair. A reasonable parent knows that Alexa's main function is to look things up on the internet.
- harryf 5y ago
  The product is _designed_ to be something humans will relate to and "become part of your lives", much like a housepet. Watch Amazon's own intro video narrated by the little girl - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CYtb8RRj5r4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CYtb8RRj5r4 At 3 minutes the little girl says "Echo loves to to play music" ... i.e. it's expected that children will project emotions onto Echo, which in turn means an implied level of trust they will have to the device. Also the girl in the video is using at times _without_ parent supervision... So sorry the whole "it's just a dumb device designed to search the Internet and you should know better" argument doesn't fly here.
  - popcube 5y ago
    yes, if they want to sold product in this way, how can they argue when people really trust it?
- southerntofu 5y ago
  [flagged]
- rowanajmarshall 5y ago
  > A reasonable parent knows that Alexa's main function is to look things up on the internet. Well, it's what Amazon would like Alexa to be for. For me, and everyone I know, its a podcast/music player plus timer and weather-teller.
- sokoloff 5y ago
  I think people who have used Alexa to look things up on the internet know how comically terrible it is at that. “Here’s something I found…[that you might struggle to figure out how I thought that was related to your query]” For us, it’s a music player, kitchen timer, and weather-teller.
NikolaNovak 5y ago
How do we arrive at "amazon endorses the challenge"? And, whatever logic is used, does it also indicate Google, Bing and Yahoo endorse it as well?
- Normal_gaussian 5y ago
  It looks like the original page is a warning to parents about the challenge existing. So where a search engine shows it in its original form its fine. Amazon selected just the challenge, skipped the warning, and told the child to do it.
- southerntofu 5y ago
  Because Alexa will give a single answer, vetted by its neural network. If i'm presented with several links and related context, i'm responsible for interpreting them and weighing the pros and cons. If the "search engine" gives me only one authoritative answer, of course it's responsible for whatever bullshit comes up. The same situation could occur between friends: - I'm bored, what should i do? - You could bake cookies, or you could jump from a cliff. In this case, irony/context is preserved. If my friend calls a "I'm bored" phone line service, and they tell them straight ahead to jump off a cliff, i'll certainly hold that phone service responsible for what happens next.
  - throwingawayyou 5y ago
    This highlights the lack of true General Intelligence and blurred lines with ML/AI. Our most advanced companies, with advanced processing power, can't even text match with the common sense of a mouse, maybe an insect? Either way, it appears not to exist. We love hype in this industry. Let's put on our headsets now, and head into the metaverse.
  - gruez 5y ago
    > Because Alexa will give a single answer, vetted by its neural network. If i'm presented with several links and related context, i'm responsible for interpreting them and weighing the pros and cons. If the "search engine" gives me only one authoritative answer, of course it's responsible for whatever bullshit comes up. so CSPC needs to fine google for their "I'm feeling lucky" feature?
sandworm101 5y ago
>> Amazon makes this product. No. If I were arguing the case I would phrase it as "Amazon provides this service". This is not a manufactured product but an advice line. Whether Amazon chooses to automate that line, or staff it with real people, or at least have a person vet recommendations ... such are Amazon's business decisions for which they are liable. The augment is not that the phone is defective but the service behind that phone.
CountDrewku 5y ago
No, this is as silly as saying Google is responsible for search results. >This is not very complicated. You're right it's not complicated. People are responsible for their own actions, that's where the line is. The device or software isn't making them do anything. Kids tell each other to do stupid things all the time, are you going to hold other children responsible when some stupid kid acts on what they tell them to? There's a reason the "would you jump off a bridge if someone told you to" saying exists....
- piva00 5y ago
  > People are responsible for their own actions, that's where the line is. In most countries on Earth there is another line as well to personal responsibility: age. Usually considered to be 18 years old when you are fully responsible for yourself, before that age there are numerous safeguards against harm to children (including provisions for their actions to not be considered on the same level as an adult). You are pushing the personal responsibility line onto a 10 years old, think about that...
  - CountDrewku 5y ago
    No I'm pushing responsibility onto the ADULT parents. Who controls what the kids do? Parents. Do you think merely putting an age restriction on alexa devices does anything? Yeah I've TOTALLY never seen any kids playing GTA, smoking, drinking, seeing R rated movies, accessing pornography etc.. Give me a break. None of that is enforceable without parents making sure it's enforced. >You are pushing the personal responsibility line onto a 10 years old, think about that You are being ignorant about the reality of the world. Think about that. I see you failed to provide an actual way of stopping children from accessing Alexa. Why don't you inform us all on how that will done? If you rely on corporations to be the moral safety compass for your children you've already failed. I don't care what legal or political ramifications you put in place, it won't help. That is 100% not the way to deal with this.
    - piva00 5y ago
      > I see you failed to provide an actual way of stopping children from accessing Alexa. Why don't you inform us all on how that will done? By not having an Alexa. At least not in the current state of affairs, I'm on the camp that always-on voice assistants need to be regulated before they invade the privacy of every home in the planet. If your product is not good enough to be used safely by your expected customers then it shouldn't exist, I'm not Amazon and I don't have all the man-years power of thousands of engineer to think about a solution to this problem, I have a moral stance where I don't think this technology should be pushed the way it is, as an unfinished piece of shit that serves the purpose of collecting data, if there is an instance where it's been shown to be dangerous then it shouldn't be on the market, it's pretty simple. I work in tech and I'm really fucking tired of getting unfinished products pushed to market so corporations (and their product managers) can use humans as guinea pigs for big tech to experiment on... Really, really tired. Don't like your tone, won't really engage further.

dr_dshiv 5y ago

>When the child spoke to the device, Alexa made a deliberate decision to look up a challenge on the internet I don't think that's fair. A reasonable parent knows that Alexa's main function is to look things up on the internet.

harryf 5y ago
The product is _designed_ to be something humans will relate to and "become part of your lives", much like a housepet. Watch Amazon's own intro video narrated by the little girl - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CYtb8RRj5r4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CYtb8RRj5r4 At 3 minutes the little girl says "Echo loves to to play music" ... i.e. it's expected that children will project emotions onto Echo, which in turn means an implied level of trust they will have to the device. Also the girl in the video is using at times _without_ parent supervision... So sorry the whole "it's just a dumb device designed to search the Internet and you should know better" argument doesn't fly here.
- popcube 5y ago
  yes, if they want to sold product in this way, how can they argue when people really trust it?
southerntofu 5y ago
[flagged]
rowanajmarshall 5y ago
> A reasonable parent knows that Alexa's main function is to look things up on the internet. Well, it's what Amazon would like Alexa to be for. For me, and everyone I know, its a podcast/music player plus timer and weather-teller.
sokoloff 5y ago
I think people who have used Alexa to look things up on the internet know how comically terrible it is at that. “Here’s something I found…[that you might struggle to figure out how I thought that was related to your query]” For us, it’s a music player, kitchen timer, and weather-teller.

NikolaNovak 5y ago

How do we arrive at "amazon endorses the challenge"? And, whatever logic is used, does it also indicate Google, Bing and Yahoo endorse it as well?

Normal_gaussian 5y ago
It looks like the original page is a warning to parents about the challenge existing. So where a search engine shows it in its original form its fine. Amazon selected just the challenge, skipped the warning, and told the child to do it.
southerntofu 5y ago
Because Alexa will give a single answer, vetted by its neural network. If i'm presented with several links and related context, i'm responsible for interpreting them and weighing the pros and cons. If the "search engine" gives me only one authoritative answer, of course it's responsible for whatever bullshit comes up. The same situation could occur between friends: - I'm bored, what should i do? - You could bake cookies, or you could jump from a cliff. In this case, irony/context is preserved. If my friend calls a "I'm bored" phone line service, and they tell them straight ahead to jump off a cliff, i'll certainly hold that phone service responsible for what happens next.
- throwingawayyou 5y ago
  This highlights the lack of true General Intelligence and blurred lines with ML/AI. Our most advanced companies, with advanced processing power, can't even text match with the common sense of a mouse, maybe an insect? Either way, it appears not to exist. We love hype in this industry. Let's put on our headsets now, and head into the metaverse.
- gruez 5y ago
  > Because Alexa will give a single answer, vetted by its neural network. If i'm presented with several links and related context, i'm responsible for interpreting them and weighing the pros and cons. If the "search engine" gives me only one authoritative answer, of course it's responsible for whatever bullshit comes up. so CSPC needs to fine google for their "I'm feeling lucky" feature?

sandworm101 5y ago

>> Amazon makes this product. No. If I were arguing the case I would phrase it as "Amazon provides this service". This is not a manufactured product but an advice line. Whether Amazon chooses to automate that line, or staff it with real people, or at least have a person vet recommendations ... such are Amazon's business decisions for which they are liable. The augment is not that the phone is defective but the service behind that phone.

CountDrewku 5y ago

No, this is as silly as saying Google is responsible for search results. >This is not very complicated. You're right it's not complicated. People are responsible for their own actions, that's where the line is. The device or software isn't making them do anything. Kids tell each other to do stupid things all the time, are you going to hold other children responsible when some stupid kid acts on what they tell them to? There's a reason the "would you jump off a bridge if someone told you to" saying exists....

piva00 5y ago
> People are responsible for their own actions, that's where the line is. In most countries on Earth there is another line as well to personal responsibility: age. Usually considered to be 18 years old when you are fully responsible for yourself, before that age there are numerous safeguards against harm to children (including provisions for their actions to not be considered on the same level as an adult). You are pushing the personal responsibility line onto a 10 years old, think about that...
- CountDrewku 5y ago
  No I'm pushing responsibility onto the ADULT parents. Who controls what the kids do? Parents. Do you think merely putting an age restriction on alexa devices does anything? Yeah I've TOTALLY never seen any kids playing GTA, smoking, drinking, seeing R rated movies, accessing pornography etc.. Give me a break. None of that is enforceable without parents making sure it's enforced. >You are pushing the personal responsibility line onto a 10 years old, think about that You are being ignorant about the reality of the world. Think about that. I see you failed to provide an actual way of stopping children from accessing Alexa. Why don't you inform us all on how that will done? If you rely on corporations to be the moral safety compass for your children you've already failed. I don't care what legal or political ramifications you put in place, it won't help. That is 100% not the way to deal with this.
  - piva00 5y ago
    > I see you failed to provide an actual way of stopping children from accessing Alexa. Why don't you inform us all on how that will done? By not having an Alexa. At least not in the current state of affairs, I'm on the camp that always-on voice assistants need to be regulated before they invade the privacy of every home in the planet. If your product is not good enough to be used safely by your expected customers then it shouldn't exist, I'm not Amazon and I don't have all the man-years power of thousands of engineer to think about a solution to this problem, I have a moral stance where I don't think this technology should be pushed the way it is, as an unfinished piece of shit that serves the purpose of collecting data, if there is an instance where it's been shown to be dangerous then it shouldn't be on the market, it's pretty simple. I work in tech and I'm really fucking tired of getting unfinished products pushed to market so corporations (and their product managers) can use humans as guinea pigs for big tech to experiment on... Really, really tired. Don't like your tone, won't really engage further.