Breaking news: Water is wet, study finds

[Uncle Robin]

Posting this here since it relates to the provider of the largest ebook ecosystem, and iirc there may be some interaction between Alexa and Kindles

Amazon and third-party services have been using smart speaker interaction data for ad targeting, in violation of privacy commitments, according to researchers at four US universities.

Academics at the University of Washington, University of California-Davis, University of California-Irvine, and Northeastern University claim "Amazon processes voice data to infer user interests and uses it to serve targeted ads on-platform (Echo devices) as well as off-platform (web)."

https://www.theregister.com/2022/04/...on_audio_data/



As shocking news goes, this is right up there with the subject line, but definitely reinforces my determination never to use any of these "smart" home tools.

[lexanderPob82]

I'm sad to see how many people don't about this issue and react like they have nothing to hide. Never would have thought being a 'product' is a nice thing. I'm extremely worried people don't care about privacy issues and do nothing about it. We need more of these articles to make people aware how abnormal this is.

[DiapDealer]

Count me as one who is perfectly aware and doesn't care in the least.

[Quoth]

Google Go, Alexa, Cortana, Siri and Facebook Portal are NOT AI or smart. The voice to text is deliberately done on the companies' servers to acquire information about the users (the product). It could be done locally twenty years ago. Phones, tablets and TVs, not just so called "smart speakers" like Echo have been supplying user information to Google/Alphabet, Amazon, Microsoft, Apple, Facebook/Meta for years and this is being used in house illegally and sold to third parties. Poorly paid humans are also used to listen as actual speech recognition (really pattern matching and then a search back end for the text) isn't much better than 25 years ago. It just needs less "training" on site.

[Quoth]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

Count me as one who is perfectly aware and doesn't care in the least.

So you don't mind being spied on by a corporation with no moral scruples and that breaks laws, but would require Police to have a warrant and wouldn't mind a neighbour spying on your?

Or maybe you would mind.

What about video (they do that too, Google Nest, Amazon Ring and some TVs). Or perhaps you've just not thought it through?

What if you live in Russia, China, North Korea, various African countries or the UK where they are becoming a police state and trying to abolish Democracy?

I have a nice bridge you can buy if you think this doesn't matter.

[DiapDealer]

Originally Posted by Quoth

So you don't mind being spied on by a corporation with no moral scruples and that breaks laws

No (and I'm unconvinced they're breaking any laws -- laws I give a carp about anyway).

Originally Posted by Quoth

but would require Police to have a warrant

Of course. I never waived my right to my 4th amendment protections. I gave Amazon my permission to "invade" my privacy in exchange for things I find extremely convenient. I don't regret that one bit.

Originally Posted by Quoth

and wouldn't mind a neighbour spying on your?

Not at all relevant to the discussion, but... which neighbor?

Originally Posted by Quoth

What about video (they do that too, Google Nest, Amazon Ring and some TVs). Or perhaps you've just not thought it through?

Duh. Of course I've thought it through. I'm not an idiot. Again... Don't care.

Originally Posted by Quoth

What if you live in Russia, China, North Korea, various African countries or the UK where they are becoming a police state and trying to abolish Democracy?

Wait, what? When did Amazon/Google become a police state trying to abolish democracy in ANY country?

Originally Posted by Quoth

I have a nice bridge you can buy if you think this doesn't matter.

No thanks. I have all the bridges, routers and repeaters I need for the time being.

What I would like, though, is for others to figure out that their views on privacy and corporations aren't universally held by all. It's not always lack of facts, or knowledge that make people do/use things that they themselves find abhorrent. It's often because many people are different from them, and worry about other things more. Please consider proselytizing less. That's not at all a moderator warning. That's just from a normal (knowledgeable) user who's sick and tired of people treating those who care about different things like they're idiots who don't know the score yet.

My eyes are wide open. I just happen to think "privacy" on the internet is overrated. You want privacy? Live off the grid. Stay off the internet. It's a huge bazaar where no one should expect any. Everybody is always going to be up in your business on the internet.

[John F]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

Please consider proselytizing less. That's not at all a moderator warning. That's just... from a normal (knowledgeable) user who's sick and tired of people treating those who care about different things like they're idiots who don't know the score yet.

...

+1

Please, please, please.

[Quoth]

You are entitled to your opinions, but literally these companies are breaking national laws and in some cases endangering the users who are really the product.

It's not about the internet per-se.

[DiapDealer]

Originally Posted by Quoth

It's not about the internet per-se.

Yes it is. Without the internet, we wouldn't be discussing it.

Nobody's doing a deep drive on the scruples of the people they buy their pizza from. They don't have a morality checklist they use to vet the vendors in the stalls of their local farmer's market before buying. So I fail to lend much credence to those who crusade against multi-national corporations because BIG! I guarantee you're happily handing your hard earned money to wife-beaters, child-molesters, tax evaders and general law-breakers every day. So why should I trust your opinion of Amazon's evilness?

And again... the notion that "you're the product" is not inherently abhorrent to me and many. I (and many others) are getting value out of the arrangement. You're not shining a light in the darkness. You're beating a dead horse.

[gmw]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

[...] What I would like, though, is for others to figure out that their views on privacy and corporations aren't universally held by all. It's not always lack of facts, or knowledge that make people do/use things that they themselves find abhorrent. It's often because many people are different from them, and worry about other things more. Please consider proselytizing less. That's not at all a moderator warning. That's just from a normal (knowledgeable) user who's sick and tired of people treating those who care about different things like they're idiots who don't know the score yet.

My eyes are wide open. I just happen to think "privacy" on the internet is overrated. You want privacy? Live off the grid. Stay off the internet. It's a huge bazaar where no one should expect any. Everybody is always going to be up in your business on the internet.

On a personal, it's all about me level, I can appreciate the argument, and even agree that too often the opposing arguments assume too much. Not everyone is ignorant of their lack of privacy.

More interesting to me are the social rather than personal implications. It seems apparent that the majority of people either don't care or don't know, it doesn't really matter which, because the result is is normalised behaviour in support of business models with no respect for user privacy. A few security breaches here and there end up having almost no impact on a business, so they have no incentive to improve.

The upshot of that, as you point out, requires anyone who wants to retain their privacy must stay off the grid. If only it were that simple! It is getting harder and harder to live life with no smartphone and no internet connection. Local businesses and local government services are closing because so many people are operating online, but their closures further limits the options of those who don't want to live online. A lot businesses operate on the assumption you are online - even just verifying who you are is more and more tied to your phone or email account.

Our personal choices have impacts beyond ourselves. For myself, I'd prefer that businesses had stronger incentives to protect our privacy. If we users will not provide that incentive (by knowing and caring about it ourselves) then it may be that government will intervene and that tends to be a rather blunt instrument.

[DiapDealer]

Originally Posted by gmw

The upshot of that, as you point out, requires anyone who wants to retain their privacy must stay off the grid. If only it were that simple! It is getting harder and harder to live life with no smartphone and no internet connection.

I never suggested it would be simple. I (perhaps mistakenly) assumed those who valued their privacy so highly wouldn't mind working to maintain it. Convenience and privacy have been at odds with each other since long before the internet (and multi-national corporations) arrived. You can't have both.

[Deskisamess]

That's just from a normal (knowledgeable) user who's sick and tired of people treating those who care about different things like they're idiots who don't know the score yet.

And again... the notion that "you're the product" is not inherently abhorrent to me and many. I (and many others) are getting value out of the arrangement. You're not shining a light in the darkness. You're beating a dead horse.

[gmw]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

I never suggested it would be simple. I (perhaps mistakenly) assumed those who valued their privacy so highly wouldn't mind working to maintain it. Convenience and privacy have been at odds with each other since long before the internet (and multi-national corporations) arrived. You can't have both.

Sure you can have both, it is quite feasible. It starts with paying for services with something other than your privacy. But, as you say, people value their privacy differently. What I find concerning is that the majority choice to not value their privacy makes it more difficult and expensive for those that do value it. In effect: your decision not to care imposes a cost on me. So is it any wonder that people like myself keep trying to persuade others to share their concern?

[DiapDealer]

Originally Posted by gmw

Sure you can have both, it is quite feasible.

No. You really can't. But that's a different argument.

Originally Posted by gmw

In effect: your decision not to care imposes a cost on me. So is it any wonder that people like myself keep trying to persuade others to share their concern?

Your decision to care threatens to impose a loss of convenience for me. Is it any wonder why people like me keep trying to persuade others why your concerns aren't that relevant?

No one's on the side of the angels, here.

[tubemonkey]

My primary Echo device is a 1st gen Echo Show 5. I use it as a clock-radio (music, radio, news, alarms, timers) and occasional short videos (cartoons, YouTube).

I keep the mic and camera turned off. I'll never use the camera and I turn the mic on long enough to issue a command, then promptly turn it off again.

I'm happy with this arrangement, privacy-wise.