Apple records and keeps users' Siri queries for up to 2 years
latimes.com
latimes.com
It sounds like it's not even voice data, but the questions and the answers given. This would probably be useful for optimising for things people are asking that siri is getting wrong?
Not so long ago, the primary goal of the 1-800-GOOG-411 service was to record people's voice queries for the purpose of bettering their voice recognition technology. After they got sufficient data samples, they discontinued the service.
http://www.infoworld.com/t/data-management/google-wants-your...
> "Google had stated that the company originally implemented GOOG-411 to build a large phoneme database from users' voice queries. This phoneme database, in turn, allowed Google engineers to refine and improve the speech recognition engine that Google uses to index audio content for searching."
I think we seriously have an issue with educating the public about how modern technologies work. I don't expect everyone to know how to code, but they should have a basic understanding of what is happening with their data while they use all these 'magical' devices.
I guess I'm more surprised that it's only kept for 2 years, than I am that the data is kept.
However, once you're scanning emails for targeting an ad specific to the email, why not try to build a profile of a person? Why not try to figure out as much as you can to target them? With a mobile device, why not track their location (linked to an account) so you can tell where they are usually going? Build their voice queries into that profile? Now when they walk to a certain area and it's tuesday near lunch, maybe you know what restaurant they like and serve an ad for a competitor.
Again, some of this is hyperbole to illustrate a point and I'm not accusing Google of anything. But Google makes its money off of being able to sell ads that are relevant to you. They try to keep it to a non-creepy level, but it's their profit engine. Apple, on the other hand, makes their money off you from getting you to part with your dollars in exchange for one of their shiny toys. In fact, when you look at Apple's revenues, only 3% come from sources other than the iPhone, iPad, iTunes, iPod, and computers. Unless Apple wants to dramatically change course, the data is much more likely to be used for improvement of the system rather than targeting of individual users.
That doesn't ensure that your data will be used in any fashion by any company. But I think Apple's revenue streams show that, at least right now, they aren't heavily into any area where targeting you via these recordings would be useful for them. In fact, if anything it would jeopardize their already highly-profitable operations and that would make it a hard decision to exploit it.
It's stupid, I know. But the same couldn't be said about advertising-driven companies (like Google and Facebook).
In other words, being mindful of user privacy is a luxury they can have right now, and it's good for their business (i.e., they're not doing it because they're "good", or others that do are "bad" or "evil" - it's just that they're now in a position that respecting user privacy is better for their bottom line than not being respectful)