• Melody Fwygon@lemmy.one
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      30
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      11 months ago

      No.

      Both Android and iOS do enforce permissions against applications that have not been granted explicit access to listen constantly.

      For example, the Google Assistant is a privileged app oftentimes; and it is allowed to listen. It does so by listening efficiently for one kind of sound, the hotword “Ok Google”.

      Other applications not only have to obtain user permission; but oftentimes that permission is restricted to be only granted “While app is in use”, meaning it’s the app on the screen, notifying the user, in the foreground, or recently opened. This permission prevents most abuses of the microphone unless someone is using an app.

        • WetBeardHairs
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          11 months ago

          Google’s business model is end-to-end targetted advertising. They collect raw data, process it, and serve ads for customers. They do not sell data because that undermines their business plan.

          This company is making claims that they can do end to end advertising. That means they must get their voice data from some other source.

    • noodlejetski@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      15
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      11 months ago

      the phone’s processor has the wake up word hardcoded, so it’s not like an ad company can add a new one on a whim. and it uses passive listening, so it’s not recording everything you say - I’ve seen it compared to sitting in a class and not paying attention until the teacher says your name.

      • RaoulDook@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        17
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        11 months ago

        Have you seen this code though? Every time I hear a statement like that, I have to wonder if you’re all just taking their word for it.

        I don’t take their word for it, unless they show me that code and prove that it is the code running on all the devices in use.

        • WldFyre@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          12
          ·
          11 months ago

          Do you also personally audit all open source software that you use?

          • Kilgore Trout@feddit.it
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            8
            ·
            11 months ago

            Your rebuttal makes no sense.

            The issue with proprietary “smart” assistants is that we can only guess how they work.

          • RaoulDook@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            11 months ago

            No but I do review code audits that certified professionals publish for things that I use when they are available, and I also don’t use any voice assistants and only use open source smartphone ROMs such as GrapheneOS.

            Basically I use the opsec methods available to me to prevent as much of the rampant spying that I can. The last thing I would do is put an open mic to Amazon’s audio harvesting bots in my home because that’s incredibly careless.

      • ArcaneSlime@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        11 months ago

        There’s no way that an app with mic permissions could basically do the same thing and pick up on certain preprogrammed words like Ford or Coke which could then be parsed by AI and used by advertisers? It certainly seems like that isn’t out of the realm of physical possibility but I’m definitely no expert. Would they have had to pay the OS maker to hardcode it in to the OS? Could that be done in an update at a later time?

        • noodlejetski@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          11
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          11 months ago

          There’s no way that an app with mic permissions could basically do the same thing and pick up on certain preprogrammed words like Ford or Coke which could then be parsed by AI and used by advertisers?

          only if you want the phone to start burning battery and data while displaying the “microphone in use” indicator all the time.

          not to mention that the specific phrases have been picked in order to cause as few false positives as possible (which is why you can’t change them yourself), and you can still fool Google Assistant by saying “hey booboo” or “okay boomer”. good luck with making it reliably recognize “Ford”, lol.

    • Tremont@lemmings.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      For that I think they use special hardware, that’s the reason that you can’t modify the calling word, and they still notify you when the voice assistant is disabled. I don’t know if this is actually true, or the companies try to hide behind this, or I just remember it incorrectly.

        • WetBeardHairs
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          11 months ago

          Personally I think that Google has been doing this for the last decade. Their assistant requires a specific wake word. But their low power wake-word chip has an asic with memory of hundreds of smaller words. It signals when any of them are said and stores that data for tokenized streams back to Google. It isn’t sending the entire voice stream, only a series of non-consecutive words that triggered low power listening hardware. Thus it circumvents wiretapping laws and falls within their TOS while retrieving extremely targeted and private conversation data for their advertising service.