6 ms·

> It seems like there's a legitimate use case for this data Maybe, but you haven't found it. To resolve your query, simply fudge the locations by 50-200m in ra

> It seems like there's a legitimate use case for this data Maybe, but you haven't found it. To resolve your query, simply fudge the locations by 50-200m in random directions. You'll still get good local results and won't pin the exact room or house down with needlessly accurate location data. Amazon can keep that data of course, it just need not be shown to human reviewers. Edit: I'm "posting too fast" and so cannot reply to the Uber comment below. I'll say, I still don't understand how human reviewers would need your address or GPS coords to improve their service after you get an Uber. How would they even verify the Uber came to the right place, they don't have the verification info there. I just don't see this as a valid use case at all.

c22 7y ago
"Alexa, order me an Uber"
FakeComments 7y ago
The reason a human reviewer needs that information is to troubleshoot the response. 1. Customer makes a request that requires location — “Alexa, what’s the weather?” 2. Alexa gets the response wrong — “A turkey is a flightless bird.” 3. You flag that as incorrect in the application. 4. An Amazon employee reviews that flagged response, and needs to figure out how Alexa misinterpreted — did she mishear you? ...is your location data malformed, so that interpretation was discarded? etc. I don’t see how Amazon employees can troubleshoot the Alexa application without both reviewing the audio files and the contextual information provided. Disclaimer: at one point, I reviewed security for Alexa teams. I no longer work there, my opinions are my own, etc.
- JohnFen 7y ago
  > I don’t see how Amazon employees can troubleshoot the Alexa application without both reviewing the audio files and the contextual information provided. From my point of view, the issue isn't really that Amazon does this. The issue is that Alexa users are surprised that Amazon does this. Their surprise indicates that no real consent was obtained. If Amazon had done something like, when a user flags an incorrect response, asking the user for permission to use that data, I would not have any issue with it.
  - FakeComments 7y ago
    I completely agree that surprising users is always a problem, precisely for the reasons you state. I just hoped to give a better idea of how it came to be people who (in my biased experience) are thoughtful about user privacy, ended up bringing together a data set users were uncomfortable with: Of course the team reviewing responses needs to see the user context! Whoops.
gjs278 7y ago
you are posting too fast. nobody cares about your concerns. hn will let you post again in about 4 hours. enjoy.
twothamendment 7y ago
> ...fudge the locations by 50-200m in random directions. You'll still get good local results and won't pin the exact room or house... You'd have to do something to adjust that for the population density or something like that. Adding 50m of error to my location wont get you off my property. 200m is close, but now you have to decide if it was at my house or my neighbor's house. Yes, I know you just threw out the idea, but it is a fun problem to think about once the location is no longer in a city.

c22 7y ago

"Alexa, order me an Uber"

FakeComments 7y ago

The reason a human reviewer needs that information is to troubleshoot the response. 1. Customer makes a request that requires location — “Alexa, what’s the weather?” 2. Alexa gets the response wrong — “A turkey is a flightless bird.” 3. You flag that as incorrect in the application. 4. An Amazon employee reviews that flagged response, and needs to figure out how Alexa misinterpreted — did she mishear you? ...is your location data malformed, so that interpretation was discarded? etc. I don’t see how Amazon employees can troubleshoot the Alexa application without both reviewing the audio files and the contextual information provided. Disclaimer: at one point, I reviewed security for Alexa teams. I no longer work there, my opinions are my own, etc.

JohnFen 7y ago
> I don’t see how Amazon employees can troubleshoot the Alexa application without both reviewing the audio files and the contextual information provided. From my point of view, the issue isn't really that Amazon does this. The issue is that Alexa users are surprised that Amazon does this. Their surprise indicates that no real consent was obtained. If Amazon had done something like, when a user flags an incorrect response, asking the user for permission to use that data, I would not have any issue with it.
- FakeComments 7y ago
  I completely agree that surprising users is always a problem, precisely for the reasons you state. I just hoped to give a better idea of how it came to be people who (in my biased experience) are thoughtful about user privacy, ended up bringing together a data set users were uncomfortable with: Of course the team reviewing responses needs to see the user context! Whoops.

gjs278 7y ago

you are posting too fast. nobody cares about your concerns. hn will let you post again in about 4 hours. enjoy.

twothamendment 7y ago

> ...fudge the locations by 50-200m in random directions. You'll still get good local results and won't pin the exact room or house... You'd have to do something to adjust that for the population density or something like that. Adding 50m of error to my location wont get you off my property. 200m is close, but now you have to decide if it was at my house or my neighbor's house. Yes, I know you just threw out the idea, but it is a fun problem to think about once the location is no longer in a city.