Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Cetun t1_iyddexa wrote

Reply to comment by Corviticus in Alexa, is the voice-assistant industry doomed? by WestEst101

Unless you're someone whos personal identifying information is important, like someone who works for the State department or a law enforcement agency. I think people really over estimate the capabilities of these companies with your data. I don't really opt out of any data mining, and periodically I will go on my Google add preferences or whatever. It's that section where Google shows you everything they "know" about you. Half of it is extremely wrong, so their profile of me is 50% accurate maybe. Just anecdotally I would think that if I were to opt out of all information gathering, Google would still be able to get information about me. I'm a registered voter so they know my name age and street address, in many states department of motor vehicles will sell that information, but it's not hard to find another places. It's not hard to find out that I'm a male, as part of general data collection from other companies they probably know what bank accounts I have, what magazine subscriptions I have, what college I went to, my cars. They can probably gather a couple of my general interests from other sources.

At the end if I were to opt out of all data collection they probably have a more accurate view of my interests. They would probably have a 90% accuracy. As for your personal information such as Social Security number, passwords, email address, ect. those will likely be gained through places with the least security. So most of your personal data will probably be taken from a parking app that your city might force you to download in order to park in public parking. That app probably doesn't have a super robust infosec team and is likely run by some guy who is friends with some council member. Your social security number is probably going to be from someday to breach from a loan servicer or insurance servicer.

Maybe I'm just an exception but with all the bad data they have on me, the "targeted" ads are either way way off base or just literally shit I have bought. I've never encountered a useful "targeted ad" in my life.

8

Dje4321 t1_iydw2q9 wrote

the thing about targeted ads most people think of, the information doesnt come from one source, it comes from a bunch of sources that get aggregated together. So while google may know nothing, someone else is going to know something, and combining the two means they can know alot.

​

If a data source sees that someone is staying at address XXX for 8+ hours a day during the night, then they can assume they live there or are related in someway. They can get another data source and get a list of names of people who live at that specific address. So now you know not only where they live, but who they have a relation too. Another data source might show you traveling from that house to an office building where you spend another 8+ hours a day at.

How many people live at that address, works at this location, and is possibly related to this list of people. 99% of the time, its going to be a small list of 1-5 people and once you have it down that far, figuring out more information isnt difficult.

By combining data sources, you can get information greater than the sum of its parts with very minimal work.

3

Corviticus t1_iydds0a wrote

Lol "opt out". If that makes you feel good man

−6

Cetun t1_iydj5k2 wrote

This is a debate about what it means to for large companies to have access to your "personal information". I'm discussing that. If all you can bring to the discussion is a quip that you think the reddit mob will upvote your usefulness to discussions about policy has come to an end. We can only hope that you're actual usefulness amounts to at least some menial labor you provide to the economy.

3

Corviticus t1_iydk1v4 wrote

I was the one who started this comment thread that you spent way to long commenting on. So you've already lost your argument on what I can 'being to the discussion'.

Maybe you're debating what it means for large companies to have access, but my comment (that you responded to mind you) brought up the reason for why Alexa is failing.

Get your info straight before you come at me bunk

−3

Cetun t1_iydm9e6 wrote

You said these companies "haven't proven" that they can be trusted with your information. I pointed out that likely they haven't done anything useful with your information, and in fact the more information they gather the less useful that information will probably be. That directly speaks to the allegations you made in your comment. If you can't see that I don't know what to say.

Also I don't know why you think Amazon isn't a large company. Alexa isn't some small startup, Alexa is Amazon. It's disingenuous to characterize it as not the product of a large company.

2

Corviticus t1_iydo1op wrote

Show me where i said Alex was small.

When Google is working with the fbi and fbi won't answer questions honestly to congress. That's a problem. Your argument of 'yea they have it but they probably won't do anything with it', doesn't matter, it's ridiculous. That's the same line of thinking as the Patriots Acts defense. 'if you don't do anything wrong you don't have anything to worry about'

0

Most_Job8557 t1_iydqlly wrote

I can't stand people like them honestly.

We fought centuries for peace, freedom and equality. And it's only going backwards.gif

2

asyrin25 t1_iydrqw9 wrote

When was the peace, freedom, and equality again?

1

Most_Job8557 t1_iydsqog wrote

>When was the peace, freedom, and equality again?

It was getting closer at least.

1

asyrin25 t1_iyduv6j wrote

Was it? When?

Prior to the Patriot act in 2001?

I bet we can both think of some groups that had pretty lousy times in the 80s and 90s who might disagree with that.

1

Cetun t1_iydytrj wrote

>Maybe you're debating what it means for large companies to have access, but my comment (that you responded to mind you) brought up the reason for why Alexa is failing.

Why is Alexa failing? -> data access concerns -> those concerns are overstated and not that big of a concern -> "what youre saying has nothing to do with what I'm talking about. You're talking about large companies and I'm talking about Alexa"

What info do you think the FBI is getting from Google that is problematic?

1

Corviticus t1_iydzsnl wrote

Jesus christ you are Cathy Newman. Also don't use quotes when that not my quote dude.

It read, you are talking about large companies in general about data access. I was talking about SPECIFICALLY Alexa and WHY it was failing. Another large company may have a voice AI that isn't failing. You see how those two things are different?? You are conflating my words in your head and spitting them back out with your own distortion. Then accusing me of karma farming or something. Sod off bunk.

I'm over it. I'm blocking you.

0