4 ms·
The fundamental problem with a lot of this is that the legal system is absolute: if information exists, it is accessible. If the courts order it, nothing you ca
by zmmmmm 8mo ago
The fundamental problem with a lot of this is that the legal system is absolute: if information exists, it is accessible. If the courts order it, nothing you can do can prevent the information being handed over, even if that means a raid of your physical premises. Unless you encrypt it in a manner resistant to any way you can be compelled to decrypt it, the only way to have privacy is for information not to exist in the first place. It's a bit sad as the potential for what technology can do to assist us grows that this actually may be the limit on how much we can fully take advantage of it.
I do sometimes wish it would be seen as an enlightened policy to legislate that personal private information held in technical devices is legally treated the same as information held in your brain. Especially for people for whom assistive technology is essential (deaf, blind, etc). But everything we see says the wind is blowing the opposite way.
- ajuhasz 8mo agoAgreed, while we've tried to think through this and build in protections we can't pretend that there is a magical perfect solution. We do have strong conviction that doing this inside the walls of your home is much safer than doing it within any companies datacenter (I accept that some just don't want this to exist period and we won't be able to appease them). Some of our decisions in this direction: - Minimize how long we have "raw data" in memory - Tune the memory extraction to be very discriminating and err on the side of forgetting (https://juno-labs.com/blogs/building-memory-for-an-always-on-ai-that-listens-to-your-kitchen) - Encrypt storage with hardware protected keys (we're building on top of the Nvidia Jetson SOM) We're always open to criticism on how to improve our implementation around this.
- bossyTeacher 8mo ago> - Minimize how long we have "raw data" in memory I believe you should allow people to set how long the raw data should be stored as well as dead man switches.
- sixtyj 8mo agoDevice should have been accompanied with a lot of examples so people are really aware how stored data could be misused. Alexa or any other similar device - their users are technically illiterate. Do you remember leaks of movie stars’ iPhone images? Multiply it by thousands… Court order, burglars, hackers - all bad actors imaginable… For you, as producer, those situations can be a nightmare if not well described in operating conditions. And devices should not be pre-setup (don’t be “Google-evil”, as they track everything if you don’t set it up different; and it is always hidden deep in the third level menu under 2-steps verification)
- HWR_14 8mo ago> Unless you encrypt it in a manner resistant to any way you can be compelled to decrypt it, In the US you it is not legal to be compelled to turn over a password. It's a violation of your fifth amendment rights. In the UK you can be jailed until you turn over the password.
- rrr_oh_man 8mo agoThere’s an interesting loophole for Face ID…
- estimator7292 8mo agoIn the US, law enforcement is specifically allowed to compel biometric scans to unlock personal devices.
- schrodinger 8mo agoFYI -- Because of this, Apple made a feature where if you click the power button 5 times, your phone goes into "needs the passcode to unlock" mode. Whenever I'm approaching a border crossing (e.g. in an airport), I'm sure to discreetly click power 5 times. You also get haptic feedback on the 5th click so you can be sure it worked even from within your pocket.
- eel 8mo agoAt Amazon, their travel trainings always recommended giving out your laptop password if asked by law enforcement or immigration, regardless of whether it was legal in the jurisdiction. Then you were to report the incident as soon as possible afterwards, and you'd have to change your password and possibly get your laptop replaced. That kind of policy makes sense for the employee's safety, but it definitely had me thinking how they might approach other tradeoffs. What if the Department of Justice wants you to hand over some customer data that you can legally refuse, but you are simultaneously negotiating a multi-billion dollar cloud hosting deal with the same Department of Justice? What tradeoff does the company make? Totally hypothetical situation, of course.
- Sharlin 8mo ago> nothing you can do can prevent the information being handed over I'm being a bit flippant here, but thermite typically works fine.
- DontForgetMe 8mo agoTricky to take data off the cloud, even with thermite
- deleted 8mo ago[deleted]