• Vinegar@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      24
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Companies DO analyze what you say to smart speakers, but only after you have said “ok google, siri, alexa, etc.” (or if they mistake something like “ok to go” as “ok google”). I am not aware of a single reputable source claiming smart speakers are always listening.

      The reality is that analyzing a constant stream of audio is way less efficient and accurate than simply profiling users based on information such as internet usage, purchase history, political leanings, etc. If you’re interested in online privacy device fingerprinting is a fascinating topic to start understanding how companies can determine exactly who you are based solely on information about your device. Then they use web tracking to determine what your interests are, who you associate with, how you spend your time, what your beliefs are, how you can be influenced, etc.

      Your smart speaker isn’t constantly listening because it doesn’t need to. There are far easier ways to build a more accurate profile on you.

      • ristoril_zip@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        7
        ·
        1 year ago

        It’s literally impossible for them to not be “analyzing” all the sounds they (perhaps briefly) record.

        [Sound] --> [Record] --> [Analyze for keyword] --> [Perform keyword action] OR [Delete recording]

        Literally all sounds, literally all the time. And we just trust that they delete them and don’t send them “anonymized” to be used for training the audio recognition algorithms or LLMs.

        • bdonvr@thelemmy.club
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          12
          ·
          1 year ago

          It is possible to analyze the traffic leaving these devices, and AFAIK it hasn’t been shown that they are doing this.

        • Solemn@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          11
          ·
          1 year ago

          The way that “Hey Alexa” or “Hey Google” works is by, like you said, constantly analysing the sounds they said. However, this is only analyzed locally for the specific phrase, and is stored in a circular buffer of a few seconds so it can keep your whole request in memory. If the phrase is not detected, the buffer is constantly overwritten, and nothing is sent to the server. If the phrase is detected, then the whole request is sent to the server where more advanced voice recognition can be done.

          You can very easily monitor the traffic from your smart speaker to see if this is true. So far I’ve seen no evidence that this is no longer the common practice, though I’ll admit to not reading the article, so maybe this has changed recently.

          • uzay@infosec.pub
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            If they were to listen for a set of predefined product-related keywords as well, they could take note of that and send that info inconspicuously to their servers as well without sending any audio recordings. Doesn’t have to be as precise as voice command recognition either, it’s just ad targeting.

            Not saying they do that, but I believe they could.

        • Solemn@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          11
          ·
          1 year ago

          It’s been published by multiple sources at this point that this happens because of detected proximity. Basically, they know who you hang out with based on where your phones are, and they know the entire search history of everyone you interact with. Based on this, they can build models to detect how likely you are to be interested in something your friend has looked at before.

          • NekuSoul@lemmy.nekusoul.de
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            10
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Yup. For companies it’s much safer to connect the dots with the giant amount of available metadata in the background than risk facing a huge backlash when people analyze what data you’re actively collecting.

            Which is why people need to call out the tracking that’s actually happening in the real world a lot more, because I don’t really want my search-history leaked by proxy to people in my proximity either.

        • Zeroc00l@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          11
          ·
          1 year ago

          So, you and your friend were talking about a subject you obviously are interested in, likely spend heaps of time online searching about, commenting and following on social media and you’re surprised you got an ad for it? Bonkers.

        • Chozo@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          18
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Following an investigation by Bloomberg, the company admitted that it had been employing third-party contractors to transcribe the audio messages that users exchanged on its Messenger app.

          So not your IRL conversations.

          There is no indication that Facebook has used the information it collected to sell ads.

          So not for ads.

          It says the opposite of the things you claimed.

        • iAmTheTot@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          1 year ago

          I generally don’t go out of my way to validate every crazy thing I read on the internet without any backing evidence supplied.

        • null@slrpnk.net
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          There is. And the parent commenter can use it to find and share evidence for their claim.