Amazon Staff Listening to Alexa Recordings

punisher5112

km991148 wrote: »

You probably think you do know what you want. But Amazon probably often think they have a better idea.

Just because you can't see what they could do with the data doesnt meant o say there isn't all sorts of stuff they can do that you dont know about. Not to mention all the stuff they will be able to do in the near future with the data you have already given..

An extreme example would be - Fast forward 10 years. Amazon knows (because everyone has their app on their phones) that you frequent with people who buy more than average amounts of alcohol (bought via amazon groceries). They therefore conclude that you are more than likely a drinker and therefore sell that to the health insurance industry and affect your premium. Why would you give them consent to do that.. because in 2025 you bought the Amazon Health Watch that has that sorta stuff buried in its Ts an Cs. (This is a very contrived example, but not beyond the realms of reality..)

I get what your saying alright.

Hopefully this won't be the case.

o1s1n

punisher5112 wrote: »

I get what your saying alright.

Hopefully this won't be the case.

My partner works in GDPR and as much as it does everyone's head in at the moment, it's scenarios like that which people in the field are now trying to prevent. She spends a lot of time at data privacy conferences and some of the projected scenarios they come up with like the above would actually scare you.

I have been a firm backer of Alexa since Echo was released but have now decided to get rid of it. Found that I was mainly using it as a bluetooth hub for my stereo and wemo switches - so going to try and see if I can find an alternative solution that doesn't involve an external connection.

Sure I'll be losing the voice commands, but after using it now for a while I don't think the tech is worth the level of privacy you need to give up in exchange.

Atomic Pineapple

km991148 wrote: »

The issue arises when the technologists design this sorta stuff meet with the realities of a call centre full of predominately young uns doing the system training and whenever they hear funny, drunken / whatever clips they play them back for fun. But even then, they probably have no real way (or care to) link them back to the end user.

It's incredibly easy to link it back to the end user (granted you're right, the kids listening are not going to do it). Even DNA that was sent into those ancestry type services was bought and traced back to the end user without any medical expertise required. You can buy vast amounts of browser history from a data broker and it is easy to identify who it belongs to from looking at things like when they look at their own profiles.

km991148 wrote: »

It may record everything at all times, but more than likely only stores it for a few seconds in order to check for the trigger word

It doesn't need to store all the audio, just the behavior it infers from it. This type of data about you is stored forever (Unless you do a GDPR request to delete it).

The Oort Cloud

I can't believe that people actually install spyware in their own home and bedrooms, it's beyond idiotic

The Oort Cloud

In the 90's GSM users were outraged to hear that there were many people listening into their private phone conversations using radio scanners, then 2 or so years later The GSM networks started to implement encryption and that put a complete end to the security breach. But look at how things have changed today, people basically want to give their privacy away to any company or person, while installing spyware boxes themselves in their own homes.

Technology really has imo made a lot of people stupid

km991148

Atomic Pineapple wrote: »

It doesn't need to store all the audio, just the behavior it infers from it. This type of data about you is stored forever (Unless you do a GDPR request to delete it).

Thats the metadata I discuss in the rest of the post.

wexfordman2

Atomic Pineapple wrote: »

Alexa records everything, at all times, not just when you request something from it, are you aware of this? The idea isn't to grab all of what you say, it's to understand things like when you leave for work, when you're home, how long you spend in a certain room, when you eat, what you watch, etc.... The more you can know about someone the less you leave to chance when trying to manipulate them.

1) smart speakers do not "record everything at all times". The speaker listens for a wake word, and only once it hears that wake word, does it forward the audio for analysis to interpret what you said.

That is the fundamental principle of how they work.

Anyone who thinks you are getting something for free with a smart speaker is a fool, and people in this day and age should understand that primarily, the user is the product, not the device, or the provider.

As far as privacy is concerned, on the proviso that the system is designed to only send recorded data to the cloud after the activation word, the I have absolutely no concerns with privacy. I don't care that Google knows I want to turn on my lights, turn up the heating, set an alarm, or ask it how many lbs in a kg. I am fully aware that anything I ask it, is not private, that it is listening and responding to me and my questions.

When I type something into a web browsers, I do so k owing that it is not private, the same when i ask my smart speaker a question, the only difference, is one method is done using my fingers, the other using my voice.

km991148

wexfordman2 wrote: »

As far as privacy is concerned, on the proviso that the system is designed to only send recorded data to the cloud after the activation word, the I have absolutely no concerns with privacy. I don't care that Google knows I want to turn on my lights, turn up the heating, set an alarm, or ask it how many lbs in a kg. I am fully aware that anything I ask it, is not private, that it is listening and responding to me and my questions.

Thats not the real concern when discussing privacy. What happens when they use the data (and specifically the metadata around your queries) to influence your future bahaviour. Or the behaviour of other services you buy. Currently (especially for google) thats all advertising sales. But its not the only thing.

o1s1n

wexfordman2 wrote: »

Anyone who thinks you are getting something for free with a smart speaker is a fool, and people in this day and age should understand that primarily, the user is the product, not the device, or the provider.

Likewise, it's also foolish to think this is about Google 'knowing you've turned on your lights, turn up your heating, set an alarm, or ask it how many lbs in a kg.'

i would imagine most people couldn't give a fiddlers if Google know they've just switched on their lights.

It's what Google do with that data. Are you okay with them building up a profile on you with this data and selling it to third parties?

Are you okay with one of those third parties perhaps being Facebook, who may then adjust what you see on your daily feed in an attempt to see if they can alter your mood? (They have admitted doing such) - the length at which this kind of thing can reach is massive and it's only in it's infancy.

Secondly, there's also the data it's sending that falls outside of the set parameters.

One thing that really freaked me out to be honest was, while looking though my Alexa saved recordings, how many times there was an accidental activation and how much conversational data has been transmitted that shouldn't have been.

That, coupled with the idea of staff listening to such recordings is enough to completely turn me off the idea - (whether the intent is malicious or not)

wexfordman2

km991148 wrote: »

Thats not the real concern when discussing privacy. What happens when they use the data (and specifically the metadata around your queries) to influence your future bahaviour. Or the behaviour of other services you buy. Currently (especially for google) thats all advertising sales. But its not the only thing.

On, expand on that for me, give me an example of what I should be worried about, give me an example also then of how it is different based in me typing something as opposed to using the spoken word.

o1s1n

wexfordman2 wrote: »

On, expand on that for me, give me an example of what I should be worried about, give me an example also then of how it is different based in me typing something as opposed to using the spoken word.

Big difference for me anyway would be a lack of control.

You type something into Google, you have complete control over what you are sending.

A listening device can mishear things and transmit incorrect data, accidentally activate as I mentioned above and send personal conversations, can pick up content in the background which is not to be transmitted - there are far more failure points in the process.

km991148

wexfordman2 wrote: »

On, expand on that for me, give me an example of what I should be worried about, give me an example also then of how it is different based in me typing something as opposed to using the spoken word.

I gave an example above and I am not saying its any different to typing or using any other device above (I also gave examples involving apps) and played down the whole "Amazon staff listening" panic.

I am not trying to be antagonistic. Nor am I being over dramatic about dystopian futures or whatever. Just trying to highlight that there are use cases that people in general have not thought about (nor have tech companies, yet) BUT you have already given data to to enable.

wexfordman2

o1s1n wrote: »

Likewise, it's also foolish to think this is about Google 'knowing you've turned on your lights, turn up your heating, set an alarm, or ask it how many lbs in a kg.'

Which is what I said also.

o1s1n wrote: »

would imagine most people couldn't give a fiddlers if Google know they've just switched on their lights.

It's what Google do with that data. Are you okay with them building up a profile on you with this data and selling it to third parties?

In so far as they do so already with .most of my internet use via a web browser, yes i am. I am fully aware that they use this data to try and sell me other products via third parties. O see no difference between the level of privacy i am afforded when i type something in to a web browser, or request it vocally.

o1s1n wrote: »

re you okay with one of those third parties perhaps being Facebook, who may then adjust what you see on your daily feed in an attempt to see if they can alter your mood? (They have admitted doing such) - the length at which this kind of thing can reach is massive and it's only in it's infancy.

Again, in the same way as it occurs when I type something, I see no difference

o1s1n wrote: »

econdly, there's also the data it's sending that falls outside of the set parameters.

What data exactly ?

o1s1n wrote: »

ne thing that really freaked me out to be honest was, while looking though my Alexa saved recordings, how many times there was an accidental activation and how much conversational data has been transmitted that shouldn't have been.

That, coupled with the idea of staff listening to such recordings is enough to completely turn me off the idea - (whether the intent is malicious or not)

Mm, I am aware of accidental triggers of the awake word, I get an audible.indication, I know exactly.when it happens, as it happens.

NIMAN

The people who will be outraged by this will be the same numpties who have been on Facebook for 10 years and telling them and the world their every desire, thought, preference etc.

km991148

NIMAN wrote: »

The people who will be outraged by this will be the same numpties who have been on Facebook for 10 years and telling them and the world their every desire, thought, preference etc.

yep - but generally people are not Numpties because they dont know this. Technology has moved much faster than people can even imagine. I don't just mean the technology and the gadgetry, I mean the business models, the ethics, the privacy concerns.

Even to the point that a lot of people may even think they get it and are comfortable with it, but not fully realising all that can happen in the background.

EDIT - The worst ones are the "journalists" who dine out on this sort of sensationalism and mock outrage. A whole industry that didnt move along with the modern world is now conspiring against us because people are not driven enough to do basic fact checking. Outrage sells headlines, semi sensible statements about Amazon not giving a sh!t about your private conversations doesn't.