People carry around a GPS tracking device with a mic and camera built-in. They use it to post their entire lives on social networks. And they're worried about privacy.
Hilarious.
i think people who are worried about privacy are not the people who are broadcasting their entire lives on social networks
I think that's a fairly naive point of view. Consider the simple fact that these devices are not to be used in isolation - e.g. you come to someone's home, etc. If you think this is too alarmist a mindset, maybe you'll remember how quite a few folk were outraged about facebook's new app which was to actively listen via your mobile's mic (so it can e.g. recognize music and add "while listening/watching" etc. info to status updates and so on.)
The problem in that case was not (just) the actively-listening part ("don't use it if you don't like it"), but rather that people (in)voluntarily become the dreaded dragnet surveillance infrastructure.
"Such future hope for decentralization." Ha! :)
Not everyone has the same level of concern over "priacy" that you do, deal with it. It's 2014, everything is being recorded now and will be even more so in the future.
Because they are not psycopaths.
well, generally speaking.
I don't let people eat poisoned food because they didn't know it was poisoned.
You'd resent me if I let you do that, wouldn't you?
Now if you turned to me and said "I don't believe you." Should I forcibly stop you?b If you turned to me and said "I know", what then?
There's an "always listening" feature, but this is off by default and only works when you are plugged into external power.
"Yes, it's possible the technology respects your privacy."
If you can suggest that Amazon Echo is potentially listening and transmitting the data to Amazon even when you don't explicitly say anything, the same can be said of Apple and Siri.
I take your meaning, in the sense that there's no inherent reason to trust one but not the other; but I think that it's fair to say that there's a big difference between:
Hey, wouldn't it be handy for our users if we started storing and pre-processing audio *before* hearing 'Alexa', so that we're ready to respond instantly? Let's quietly take down the text that says that we don't do that.
Hey, wouldn't it be a good idea if we ignored our users' explicit election to turn off a feature?
Yes, people carry smartphones, use social networks. However that doesn't automatically disallow them from worrying about privacy, as they simply don't have an option. And no, sometimes not using a smartphone or a social network is not an option for a lot of people.
What they should do is advocate for privacy and try to change the situation.
Anyone who elects to put their personal information in a public forum or any kind has willingly surrendered that information. They made a choice to make private information public.
How then, can they be concerned about privacy?
I CHOOSE what to share on a social network. Devices spying on me rob me of that choice and my ability of filtering what public knows about me.
>No, what I'm saying is, what you choose to share is public. People share so much every day, nobody needs to spy on you at all. Everyone thinks the govt./bigco is out to get them. If they are, they don't even need to do any actual work, people give the information away hand over fist. [1]
Perhaps I want to be in charge of what can and can't be known about my personal life. I know, a radical thought... Maybe I want other people to know some things and not others. Why so many people seem OK with notion of corporations doing whatever they want with the data they collect without accountability?
They even blame the victims: "You bought a device with the things that 99% of devices in that category bring and can be used to collect information about you. So it's your fault, you could have bought that very difficult to get (or obsolete) device that doesn't have them, or none at all. Of course, neither corporations nor security agencies can be blamed for their sociopathic behaviour. It surely has something to do with business or security that's entirely reasonable even though they kept it in secret."
Everyone thinks the govt./bigco is out to get them. If they are, they don't even need to do any actual work, people give the information away hand over fist.
I joke! In all seriousness, did you find your concentration improved as you didn't feel the desire to constantly check for text messages or emails?
Then I was sitting down reading a book (Speaker for the Dead by Orson Scott Card) and realised I'd blown 4 hours on it rather than doing any work. Rushed and grabbed the laptop and nothing was broken, on fire and no one had emailed me. Then I did a two hour coding binge. Did more on that day than any other and it has just got better and better.
Concentration has improved as has tolerance and patience. I also read a lot more because I have the time to.
I'm only posting on here because I'm waiting for compile cycles :)
I care about the content of my private communications w/ other people. Including in-person conversations.
> I care about the content of my private communications w/ other people. Including in-person conversations.
A widely accepted security fundamental is that metadata, such as where, when, and with whom you interact, is as valuable as the content of those communications. People in the surveillance business (from security agencies to businesses who track users) value metadata for a reason.
Think about it this way: If you wanted to spy on someone what would be more valuable?: Recording everywhere they go and everyone they talk to, or recording the content of those communications?
Knowing I talk to Vendor X is worthless because soooooooooo many people talk to Vendor X. Knowing I'm buying 1000Y from X is more useful, eh?