Amazon Sidewalk to go Live on 08 Jun

[jhowell]

Originally Posted by rcentros

Hopefully you're not equating Amazon with a "good neighbor" who's just "helping out folks." Because it's not the neighbors getting together and mutually sharing, it's Amazon building some kind of connected mesh. I don't buy into their stated reasons for it. I also don't trust them to keep sidewalk disabled Echo devices "sidewalk disabled."

No, that was not my point at all. I have already written in this thread that I think the opt out strategy for Sidewalk is sleazy and will end up hurting Amazon more than it helps Sidewalk. Your attitude expressed above shows how this has backfired for them.

I have also written that I find it odd that Apple's Find My network isn't being called out too. It uses my iPhone and its cellular service to help locate other people's AirPods and AirTags, and they don't give me the option to opt out as far as I know also make me opt out instead of opt in.

I was referring to the idea of keeping Sidewalk enabled, at no actual additional cost to yourself in most cases, in order to help your neighbor locate their lost dog. I can understand disabling Sidewalk because you no longer trust Amazon, but the argument that the additional bandwidth usage of Sidewalk is going to be a burden doesn't fly for me.

[Deskisamess]

You can easily turn off Apple Find My in the settings of the iPhone/iPad/Mac/ etc.

[jhowell]

Originally Posted by Deskisamess

You can easily turn off Apple Find My in the settings of the iPhone/iPad/Mac/ etc.

Thanks!

[haertig]

Originally Posted by jhowell

I can understand disabling Sidewalk because you no longer trust Amazon, but the argument that the additional bandwidth usage of Sidewalk is going to be a burden doesn't fly for me.

Because "they're just taking a little bit" is not a justification to take it. So their customers should shut them down cold, from the start, so they don't get any ideas later that they can "take just a little bit more". It is not right to take something from someone because you judge that it shouldn't be a burden to them. Especially when you don't even know that person - or those millions and millions of persons, as is the case with Amazon's current endeavors. You take a penny from each one and you have really enriched yourself, haven't you?

[jhowell]

Originally Posted by haertig

Because "they're just taking a little bit" is not a justification to take it. So their customers should shut them down cold, from the start, so they don't get any ideas later that they can "take just a little bit more". It is not right to take something from someone because you judge that it shouldn't be a burden to them. Especially when you don't even know that person - or those millions and millions of persons, as is the case with Amazon's current endeavors. You take a penny from each one and you have really enriched yourself, haven't you?

I have stated multiple times already that I agree that Amazon (and Apple) did something sleazy by making this an opt-out feature. I understand why they chose to do it, but I think it was wrong for them to do it that way. For me it is a minor transgression and I am not going to get worked up over it. Using my bandwidth to track my behavior across websites is a common practice for many companies and bothers me much more than this.

Opt-in vs. opt-out is a separate issue from whether or not I believe that Sidewalk itself is a good idea. I think that it is and I would have happily enabled it, had it been an opt-in feature. As it is I plan to leave it turned on.

[Gardenman]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

Does everybody get all up in arms if a program uses a portion of their bandwidth to periodically check for new versions of itself by default? Are we asked if this is OK when installing, or do we have to disable it later if we don't want it? Perhaps a mixture of both?

Are we asked by Windows 10 if we want to enable automatic updates, or do we have to jump through considerable (not to mention technical) hoops to disable the behavior that's enabled by default?

Have we given express permission for every packet that every piece of hardware we've ever hung on our networks sends to other pieces of hardware (local or remote) by default (even though not all of it is actually necessary)?

Were we explicitly asked if we wanted to pass all ipsec traffic through our router's firewall when setting up our broadband connection? Or was it enabled by default?

All this is using bandwidth for you. Sidewalk is giving your bandwidth - that you paid for - to others.

[DiapDealer]

Originally Posted by Gardenman

All this is using bandwidth for you. Sidewalk is giving your bandwidth - that you paid for - to others.

Yes. And giving me theirs, should I need it. I understand the ramifications completely. I'm all for it. And it's not 100% about "giving it to others". The bandwidth can also be used to track my own Tile enabled devices should they they be out in yard beyond normal bluetooth and wifi range.

Besides... it doesn't matter when the argument from some is that Sidewalk could conceivably cause someone to go over their data cap. Most of those things I mentioned could also cause someone to go over their data cap without their knowledge.

[Deskisamess]

The data cap is 500mb per account per month. That's .125% of the average internet user's use per month.

No one is going to be steaming video or downloading porn using someone else's connection.

If you don't use any of the Amazon devices that use Sidewalk, what's the problem?

[Catlady]

Originally Posted by jhowell

I have stated multiple times already that I agree that Amazon (and Apple) did something sleazy by making this an opt-out feature. I understand why they chose to do it, but I think it was wrong for them to do it that way. For me it is a minor transgression and I am not going to get worked up over it. Using my bandwidth to track my behavior across websites is a common practice for many companies and bothers me much more than this.

Opt-in vs. opt-out is a separate issue from whether or not I believe that Sidewalk itself is a good idea. I think that it is and I would have happily enabled it, had it been an opt-in feature. As it is I plan to leave it turned on.

OK, forget the automatic opt in. Why do you think Sidewalk is a good idea? How does it benefit you in any concrete (pun intended) way? I don't see what it does for me, or for my neighbors. I do see that Amazon potentially has another tool to exploit.

[jhowell]

Originally Posted by Catlady

OK, forget the automatic opt in. Why do you think Sidewalk is a good idea? How does it benefit you in any concrete (pun intended) way? I don't see what it does for me, or for my neighbors. I do see that Amazon potentially has another tool to exploit.

In the short term both the cost and benefits to me of Sidewalk are pretty much non-existent. Over time it could help me and my neighbors locate lost items or pets and make my home automation (lights, etc.) more reliable.

As a gadget geek the new technology interests me and being part of that gives me a good feeling. Amazon has developer kits available to those who want to come up with new applications for Sidewalk. I suspect that the existence of a low power, low bandwidth, neighborhood networks will enable the creation of new use cases that I can't imagine.

[rcentros]

Originally Posted by John F

How do you feel about ads on the internet?

I block most of them with Ublock Origin. What does that have to do with Amazon using someone else's property without permission?

[rcentros]

Originally Posted by Catlady

OK, forget the automatic opt in. Why do you think Sidewalk is a good idea? How does it benefit you in any concrete (pun intended) way? I don't see what it does for me, or for my neighbors. I do see that Amazon potentially has another tool to exploit.

That's the way I look at it. They wouldn't be doing this if there wasn't a net gain for them. Corporations are almost never altruistic. If they do something like this, there's more to it than they say there is. I'm guessing it's yet another way to collect data — either for more control or for more profit (or both).

Remember when Google's slogan was "Don't Be Evil" as they collected more and more personal data from you?

[Catlady]

Originally Posted by jhowell

In the short term both the cost and benefits to me of Sidewalk are pretty much non-existent. Over time it could help me and my neighbors locate lost items or pets and make my home automation (lights, etc.) more reliable.

As a gadget geek the new technology interests me and being part of that gives me a good feeling. Amazon has developer kits available to those who want to come up with new applications for Sidewalk. I suspect that the existence of a low power, low bandwidth, neighborhood networks will enable the creation of new use cases that I can't imagine.

I don't see any reason to accept a supposed service that Amazon doesn't seem able to justify as a consumer benefit. Finding lost items (which would require buying a bunch of those Tile doohickeys) and better home automation are rather nebulous. I'm willing to admit that I lack the imagination to know what might be future possible consumer benefits with Sidewalk, but I'll wait to know what they are before enabling it.

[John F]

Originally Posted by rcentros

I block most of them with Ublock Origin. What does that have to do with Amazon using someone else's property without permission?

You seemed rather concerned about use of bandwidth.

Originally Posted by rcentros

What if you've got ancient DSL service and you know you're neighbor has 1 GB cable connection and an Echo. Can you unplug your DSL modem and stream on your neighbor's service?

What if you didn't pay your bill and don't have any Internet service at all, but you have a registered Echo and your neighbor has an Echo? After all, your "service" is technically "down," right?

And what about a family trying to get along on capped Internet service (like that provided by AT&T) who all stream different services and are constantly on the edge of overcharges? Is Amazon responsible for paying those?

Fortunately I'll never have to find out, since I'll never have an Echo.

Which do you think uses more bandwidth, Amazon sidewalk, or ads?

You also seemed to be concerned about automatically opting in. Can you show me an option where I can opt-out for ads?

[haertig]

Originally Posted by John F

You also seemed to be concerned about automatically opting in. Can you show me an option where I can opt-out for ads?

I thought we were talking about Amazon taking your bandwidth, without asking, and giving it to others. How did you tangent off to advertisements?

The only thing ads have in common with Amazon stealing bandwidth is that they're both annoying. But then, a skunk in my kitchen would be annoying too. Doesn't mean it's a good analogy to Amazon's theft.

Ads show up in your browser because you went to a website that loaded them. When you go to a website, you are requesting their content. That content may include text, images, scripting, ads, spyware and a whole bunch of other stuff. But the point is - YOU went to that website and requested a page load. YOU initiated things.

That is not what Amazon Sidewalk is doing. They are initiating the bandwidth theft all on their own. Therein lies the difference ... and the problem.

( FWIW, to help get rid of many of your ads, check into NoScript (or ScriptSafe), AdBlockPlus, and Ghostery. )