Amazon announces new, smaller Echo | Hacker News Reader

Amazon announces new, smaller Echo

theverge.com

I must be dumb but in today's world of the big 4 spying on you all day long, I'm trying to kick out voice assistants, not bring more in. After Google Now, my voice control needs are done and someone said enough is as good as a feast.

Now when you get Mrs. Roddenberry's TTS voice powering a smart home, we may have to revisit.

These devices all ride on your own personal network. Their traffic is easy to monitor for timing and size of the data transmitted outward. If you are worried about spying you might put a piece of tape over your webcam, but I can't say I have heard of anyone physically disabling their laptop's microphone. These voice assistants are basically the same security threat as those open microphones on your laptop. Both of them are still less dangerous than a smartphone that has its own network connection and can more easily hide its spying.

Just because you can monitor the traffic doesn't mean you can verify what it's sending. If the assistant is designed properly, it'll be using pinned certs and everything it can do to encrypt and compress the data, but to be usable it's probably listening and throwing away a lot of data to be responsive (like how the new iPhone cameras constantly capture when on, and give you appropriate moment right before you press). There is a possibility that additional trigger phrases may exist that Amazon/Google/etc capture. It might be rare enough to be difficult to trace.

I wonder what data was handed over in that Echo subpoena for the murder case? http://www.cnn.com/2017/03/07/tech/amazon-echo-alexa-bentonv...

Yes, you can't tell what it being transferred. But knowing when and how much it is transferring shows that it isn't actively listening to everything.

If you are worried about companies like Amazon and Google lying about what these devices use as wake words, why would you trust Google, Apple, or Microsoft that they don't lie about the same thing regarding your phone or laptop? That is my main problem with these arguments regarding voice assistants. These devices are really just a microphone and an internet connection. They are no more a tool of Big Brother than your phone, computer, TV, Xbox, or any other device with a microphone and internet connection. In fact, many of those devices can do a better job of hiding their compromised status.

There is an option: Don't use voice assistants.

That's my option. I trust Apple (and Google for the few devices in my home) to not be listening persistently when they say they don't. I don't enable Hey Google, Hey Siri. That could be naive but as you said you have to trust at some point (even if it's the compiler or hardware).

I can disable hardware at the USB bus level on my MacBooks and other generic OS - I don't use microphones on them anyway. If you really distrust you can wire a headphone in and disable that.

Persistent voice recognition is a rubicon I don't want crossed in my home. It's a "feature" I don't think is needed. DONOTWANT is a signal I want to send to the market, fwiw, by not buying these devices.

Many people physically disable their laptops microphone. Some people in my office do and I think the most famous case is Zuckerberg.

https://boygeniusreport.files.wordpress.com/2016/06/mark-zuc...

Putting tape over a microphone doesn't physically disable it. People have been able to get audio out of a room by watching the vibrating of windows or simulate a key logger by listening to the sounds a keyboard makes. If you are worried about being actively spied upon, nothing short of physically disconnecting the microphone is 100% secure.

The difference being someone might actually care about what Zuckerberg is saying.

And? I was simply refuting the comment "..I can't say I have heard of anyone physically disabling their laptop's microphone". I know people who do this, not just Zuckerberg.

Unless you also keep cell phones out of your house, this really seems like closing the barn door after the horse is looooong gone.

I think the difference is that those devices were created and used with the expectation that they won't monitor users. The new age devices primarily want to monitor devices.

What’s the difference? Devices like the Echo sit idle, using local hardware to listen for a specific wake phrase. Upon hearing it, they activate, send what you say off to the cloud, and take action accordingly. Modern smartphones do exactly the same thing. In both cases there is the expectation that they do not do anything about what they hear besides commands prefixed with the wake phrase, and in both cases you pretty much have to take the manufacturer’s word that this is actually the case.

People always jump up and defend IoT devices, and while they make reasonable points (you can monitor their bandwidth, you already have a smartphone, etc), I'm just not willing to provide yet another potential entry point into my personal life, especially one that provides so little added convenience over the smartphone that is always within reach anyway.

i’m not here defend it, I’m just here to tell you that I’m sick and tired of people whining about it every time there’s an article like this.

Simply don’t use it if you don’t want it. Move on. Quit reading stories like this.

[Update] I just blogged my comments.

https://h4labs.wordpress.com/2017/09/27/groundhog-day-amazon...

The point is that I heard you the first ten times.

At this point, that's kind of like telling non-smokers to just not breathe smoky air when they're around other people. These things are everywhere, people carry them in their pockets, millions of households contain standalone units. You're more likely to be in listening distance of a virtual assistant than not.

It'll be interesting to see how this compares with the Google Home Mini (http://www.droid-life.com/2017/09/19/google-home-mini-exclus...). For me the ideal size would be invisible or something I can tape to the inside top of my entertainment center.

The key feature that would make me get a set of these, or competing devices, is independent voice commands per device. For example, I'd like to be able to have one in each bedroom and say "turn off the lights" and have it only affect that room. The last time I looked there wasn't a product on the market that supported this.

Echo + Hue totally does this. Though, you have to say "Turn off the bedroom lights." if you just want the bedroom. "Turn off the lights" will turn off all the lights.

BTW- it's magic, amazing and too expensive. But if you're dumb and like geeky tech things, it's pretty rad.

To clarify the other reply and OP's comment, I think he wants to say "turn off the lights" to the Echo he has in the bedroom, and have it know to turn off _just_ the bedroom lights. Ditto for the one in the living room, etc.

Echo + Hue totally does this. Though, you have to say "Turn off the bedroom lights."

I think that's exactly what the OP wants to do not have to do.

If I say "turn off the bedroom lights" it will turn off the same set of lights regardless of which room I am standing in. If I say it in my guest bedroom the guest bedroom lights should turn off. If I say it in my bedroom my lights should turn off. I don't want my guests turning my lights on and off while they figure out the voice controls.

I know it makes me sound like a crotchety old man, but I just can't justify giving my lightbulbs access to my home network when the wall switches I already have seem to work just fine.

That sounds like a configuration issue. "The Lights" is likely setup as the default group including all your lights. You should be able to group them separately into something like "bedroom lights" and "living room lights".

They just announced this feature. The new echo knows where it is and saying something like "turn off the lights" to the echo in your living room vs your bedroom will now work as you would want it to.

Do you have a link for this? The linked article doesn't mention it and neither do a couple other articles I've seen for the new echo.

http://www.techradar.com/news/amazon-echo-2-arrives-packing

> Amazon is also improving its Alexa API, so it will be easier for the speaker to talk to gadgets in certain rooms without actually having to say that room. So, if you want to turn off a light in the dining room and are in the dining room, only that light will turn off. This is a big thing for Alexa, as it makes the process of using the digital assistant easier.

Thanks. This was exactly the info I was looking for.

I am really surprised devices like this don't support naming. Both individual and general. Like starting a conversation with one "Home" indicating you are talking to all, Master for master bedroom, and such. Heck you should be able to name them like pets. Spot, roll over. Sit. Lights on.. lights off. its cold...

Serious Question; Is Google ever going to get out of catch-up mode in this department?

The new Google Home Mini is smaller than this device. They started later than Amazon but they've made a huge amount of progress in a year and aren't really that far behind anymore. In fact in some areas Amazon is playing catchup (such as multi-user voice support)

The other big area Google has an advantage in is in one that really matters - the reliability of its voice recognition. I have both a Google Home and an Echo and the Google Home and the Google device's actual speech recognition is dramatically better. Maybe it's just my voice, but the Echo seems to have a lot of trouble understanding me with some commands even after doing the training, while the Google Home rarely misunderstands me.

I'm convinced amazon shipped the echo to collect speech data so that they don't get killed if there's an interface shift. Apple and Google are both getting millions of hours with android and ios.

It's also the reason why samsung is forcing everyone to use bixby.

Google originally did this with the free IVR Google Voice offering, no?

Google does this with everything that's not search.

I'm waiting for them to start subsidizing cars in exchange for putting lidar in them.

Why would they waste their time? They already have a speech recognition platform, it's called android.

Amazon is wasting money on hardware because they missed out on mobile and with echos they're hoping to be there when the NLP catches up.

Nah, these are definitely their own platform. Just ask anyone that owns one - they don't use it as a phone substitute. Plus, it would be another method for Google to bring iPhone users into the fold.

I know plenty of friends and relatives with an Alexa, but a lot less with a Google Home. I think Google needs to make an equivalent of the Echo Dot - a small, cheap device that people can put in multiple rooms.

I'm guessing you either live in the bay area/seattle or work at amazon.

I don't know anyone in new york who uses an echo. I've heard of a few people who got one when it came out but they all stopped using it after a day or 2.

Google will be the winner the personal assistant market because they have billions of people who use android, maps, gmail, drive, search, calendar, translate etc. If we ever switch to conversational interfaces they could be in the position to really hurt Amazon.

I live in New York, so, no.

While I agree that Google is in a stronger position to win the eventual personal assistant battle, I disagree with your original proposition that it'll be done through Android phones.

I think the potential for voice assistants is overhyped, but there is still potential there, and you can't achieve the same thing with a phone that's in your pocket/bag/whatever. Ask someone that uses one before you dismiss the product category entirely.

I'd love to hear what the use cases are besides ordering stuff from amazon.

I could think of maybe using alexa to control my IoT devices (I don't own any) but even then I'd be more interested in controlling them when I'm not home.

If there's a market for these devices it's as a replacement for premium speakers like sonos / bose. Apple seems to be going in that direction with the homepod and it has a great shot at dominating because most of the consumers in that market already own other apple products.

My phone is next to me 99% of the time. Google knows when my meetings are, where I'm flying next week and who I talk to. If there is a shift to voice it will probably be because of another wearable device (like airpods or glasses).

Use cases

- controlling IoT devices, like lights, which you control when you are at home

- playing music, podcasts

- playing videos (via Chromecast/whatever)

- setting alarms

- asking simple questions

- checking weather

I could go on. You're saying "if there is a market for these devices" as if there isn't already a demonstrated market. Amazon is selling a ton of them! Your phone is a personal device, while an Echo is used by a household. Their use cases are very different.

Again, I get that this might not be a good device for you. But it's silly to say there are no uses beyond ordering stuff from Amazon, because people use them for a lot of stuff every single day.

- Setting alarms and reminders.

- Ask whether

- Very occasionally, play music.

I use it every day, it is not as important to me as a phone, but it cannot be replaced either.

I had the exact same thought as you two minutes ago if I'm honest and apparently that's on the way with the new pixel phone.

http://www.droid-life.com/2017/09/19/google-home-mini-exclus...

You don't think they should be worried at all about the Echo platform?

I can't think of a single problem that an echo can solve for me that the phone in my pocket can't.

Echo makes perfect sense for amazon but as a consumer I don't get what the benefit is.

Apple will eat this market because they're smart enough to position the homepod as a premium speaker instead of a home assistant. They'll also eat into Sonos and Bose.

Except Chromecast, cant really recall what innovative Google did with hardware

Google Glass was innovative?

Glass was innovative and ahead of it's time but that being said it feels like Google (and Apple for that matter) are falling into the risky playbook of mirroring other companies' ideas and assuming their scale will take care of the rest

It is a failure

Haha what is a bass tweeter tho

Yes, I was guessing they meant to say it had dedicated bass AND tweeter (which is presumably only noteworthy given the smaller size, as the old Echo has both[1] - and the Dot doesn't [2]).

1: https://www.ifixit.com/Teardown/Amazon+Echo+Teardown/33953

2: https://www.ifixit.com/Teardown/Amazon+Echo+Dot+Teardown/613...

Alternatively, it could be a full range driver, but more unlikely giving the phrasing.

I was hoping by "smaller Echo" they meant "smaller than the Dot".

Also, Alexa is most useful in a car and I'm still disappointed that there's no apparent way to use Alexa for things like turn-by-turn navigation.

Uh, why would Alexa be better than Siri or Google esp. since they're likely tied to CarPlay/Android Auto?

The market there is very crowded, I doubt Amazon's looking to disrupt there.

If I were Amazon and wanted to enter the car market, I'd make a decent dash camera based on their work with Echo Show... could possibly disrupt Apple/Google.

I just happen to like Alexa for everything else. Why would I not want to put it to use in my car as well?

Besides, I don't own any iOS devices (well, except an iPhone 3GS sitting in a closet), so Siri's out of the question. It'd be nice if I wasn't tied to one other choice.

To those who lack the empathy to understand how these devices might be useful to anyone, it's incredibly useful to be able to:

- hands-free set multiple timers while cooking - set timers for kids to give them structured assignments (clean your room, you have 10 minutes, etc.) - have ambient music going in the home that any of the kids can participate in as they please (we have 4) - sound machines as sleep aids - lamps on/off in the living room on schedule and by voice command

I could go on but I think I get my point across. Households with kids get a lot of use out of these things.

Can these devices tie in to existing hi-fi systems (either via bluetooth, or physical outputs)? Or are you tied to the teeny-tiny internal speaker for your music?

(Edit, never mind. Commented before reading the article like a pleb - the answer to my own question appears to be yes)

We have both the echo and echo dots. The echo needs no help making enough sound to fill our kitchen/living room. The dot in our bedroom is hooked up to some old Klipsch 2.1 PC speakers. For the kids, the internal speaker on those is pleeeenty ;)

Is there any open source version of an IoT "hub"? Not necessarily voice control but a FOSS alternative to HomeKit, Google Home and this?

I just want a JBL speaker with bass and Google Assistant with a battery.

Big Brother is always listening.

Listening in on what you're doing is so valuable they can offer free phone calls and free music.

> so valuable

Some poor MBA SOB probably already ran a spreadsheet on that.

Actually, probably a bunch of poor MBA SOBs, and the results are all over the map, so there's some mana raining down from the optimists.

One of these days they'll converge on a lower valuation, and turn off the tap. Or shrug and say, what the heck, the free stuff ain't worth much either, and it keeps the rioting down ...

Playing new, smaller youtubes

am I the only one who's still convinced these things are useless

Add me too..they are Useless. Period.

As with everything it depends on the person. I find mine quite useful thanks. I also find my smart watch to be a critical part of my day but I don't tell everyone they are a must have. Everyone has their own use cases.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com