6 ms·

I have one device that potentially spies on me. Therefore it is logical that I should also get tons of other devices that spy on me -- or else I will be a hypoc

I have one device that potentially spies on me. Therefore it is logical that I should also get tons of other devices that spy on me -- or else I will be a hypocrite, no? Also I should refrain from any criticism directed against the spying features that companies put into their products these days. That would also be hypocritical because I have this one device that can spy on me....

SamBam 8y ago
I thought the question was valid: you looked down on people who would buy a device that spies on them, yet you bought a device that spies on you. The point was that the vast majority of people, even us techies, are willing to sacrifice some privacy for the benefits these devices bring us. (And yes, sometimes these benefits are the direct result of spying. When I shop on Amazon, I often look at the section "Customers who looked at X ultimately bought Y." Thank you, Amazon, for spying on those customers, and recommending a better product.)
- nyxtom 8y ago
  This doesn't necessarily mean that product Y is better suited for you in particular it may just mean people might have been artificially funneled into purchasing it either through wide advertising reach or through models such as this. It's certainly useful in some regards but it's not a catch-all and a lot of that is simply because of wide reach advertising, better marketing, and in the case of Amazon many products may just have artificial reviews. You still have to consider the alternative that what you are being recommended, even the "Customers who looked at" doesn't automatically mean there isn't bias or artificial incentives that push people in one direction over another. There's a reason Thaler won the nobel prize in economics for his work on "nudge" theory.
mikeash 8y ago
It’s fine if you want to minimize it or don’t like it. But don’t act incredulous that people do this, when you also do it.
bhauer 8y ago
Not only that, but a smartphone provides a spectrum of functionality and any "smart agent" function is just one of many. Many of us turn those features off, meaning that—unless the phone has been rooted or is not doing what its manufacturer claims—it is not even listening for wake words. But a smartphone with this feature disabled still provides its remaining suite of functions. These in-home "smart speakers" exist only to be agents listening for wake words. I am not sure why use of a smartphone is painted as hypocrisy when countering the argument that consumers should be cautious about installing smart speakers in their homes. Clearly most people who are cautioning against the use of smart speakers turn off the listening agent features on their smartphones and recommend that others do that as well.

SamBam 8y ago

I thought the question was valid: you looked down on people who would buy a device that spies on them, yet you bought a device that spies on you. The point was that the vast majority of people, even us techies, are willing to sacrifice some privacy for the benefits these devices bring us. (And yes, sometimes these benefits are the direct result of spying. When I shop on Amazon, I often look at the section "Customers who looked at X ultimately bought Y." Thank you, Amazon, for spying on those customers, and recommending a better product.)

nyxtom 8y ago
This doesn't necessarily mean that product Y is better suited for you in particular it may just mean people might have been artificially funneled into purchasing it either through wide advertising reach or through models such as this. It's certainly useful in some regards but it's not a catch-all and a lot of that is simply because of wide reach advertising, better marketing, and in the case of Amazon many products may just have artificial reviews. You still have to consider the alternative that what you are being recommended, even the "Customers who looked at" doesn't automatically mean there isn't bias or artificial incentives that push people in one direction over another. There's a reason Thaler won the nobel prize in economics for his work on "nudge" theory.

mikeash 8y ago

It’s fine if you want to minimize it or don’t like it. But don’t act incredulous that people do this, when you also do it.

bhauer 8y ago

Not only that, but a smartphone provides a spectrum of functionality and any "smart agent" function is just one of many. Many of us turn those features off, meaning that—unless the phone has been rooted or is not doing what its manufacturer claims—it is not even listening for wake words. But a smartphone with this feature disabled still provides its remaining suite of functions. These in-home "smart speakers" exist only to be agents listening for wake words. I am not sure why use of a smartphone is painted as hypocrisy when countering the argument that consumers should be cautious about installing smart speakers in their homes. Clearly most people who are cautioning against the use of smart speakers turn off the listening agent features on their smartphones and recommend that others do that as well.