
Amazon’s plan for Alexa - rchaudhary
https://www.technologyreview.com/s/614676/amazon-alexa-will-run-your-life-data-privacy/
======
dorkwood
It still baffles me that these things have taken off. I suspect that the
people buying them are purchasing the spectacle of having a virtual assistant
rather than any sort of useful functionality.

The last time I interacted with one was at a friend's place. We were talking
over coffee and somehow Brad Pitt's age came up. Neither of us knew how old he
was. My friend paused, and then yelled out across the room "OK Google, how old
is Brad Pitt?" The answer came back almost immediately. "103 years old".

~~~
sandGorgon
This is the NBU market - Next Billion Users.

India is the world's fastest growing consumer of voice traffic. At this point
30% of all google searches in India are voice and growing.

The fact that we have over 20 mainstream languages contributes to this. a lot
of people now write Indian vernacular in Latin script which is highly
unstandardised in spelling.

Voice is far far superior.

~~~
statguy
Voice is potentially superior only for a set of unambiguous questions - e.g.
the temperature outside and that is assuming that the recognition part works.

~~~
apexalpha
Voice is superior when your language isn't Latin-based.

Billions of Chinese use voice as a main input for phones.

------
buzzkillington
> If you’re one of the eight or nine people on the planet who has never
> interacted with Alexa, you’re both missing out and not really missing out.

I must be officially old, because I see no reason to give voice commands to
things. If I did I'd just attach a microphone to the server I run at home and
connect it to things.

~~~
p1necone
I still don't find voice activation to be very good in the cases I've used it.
The problem of transcribing what you're saying seems to be solved pretty well,
but (at least in the applications I've used it in - which is just navigation
via google maps on my phone) there still seems to be an inherent problem of
discoverability.

It took me a fair bit of trial and error to work out the exact magic words to
say to get google maps to launch navigation to a given address by car without
requiring me to use the touch screen at all.

My natural inclination was to say "Hey Google, give me directions to 123 fake
street" but this would bring up a route (or if you're especially unlucky a
list of different places for you to choose from) but require you to press a
"start" button with your finger, and often also require you to switch the
navigation type from bus/walk/cycle to car manually too.

"Give me directions to 123 fake street by car" would skip the navigation type
selection, but still require you to manually press a "start" button (various
variations of "ok google, begin" or "ok google, start" etc didn't seem to do
anything")

After a long period (months) of having to press a tiny button manually while
driving to start navigation I finally discovered that if you say "Navigate to"
rather than "Give me directions to" it would skip past the start button screen
and jump straight to giving you directions.

So now it works great, but I hope I don't have to go through tedious trial and
error with everything voice activated to work out the exact phrasing it wants.

~~~
reethaxor
I had to look up the voice command to cancel the current directions without
touching the phone. It's "exit navigation," which is very similar to the
command you found to start them.

All of these commands printed out on a list somewhere would probably be
consistent, and make sense. But you don't get to see that list. Google and
others want to present these systems as magical AI helpers that you just
converse with, as if they had any more intelligence than a touch tone menu
system circa 1990.

Knowing how these things work, it just strikes me as hubris. The UX isn't good
because they can't admit that the whole system isn't as good as they say it is
or want it to be, and this makes them opaque and frustrating to interact with.

~~~
Karunamon
I think that's because we're in the very early stages of a transitional
period. The end goal is something like the Star Trek computer, free-form
natural language queries ending in desired actions. I think this approach of
filing off all the rough edges (namely, handling every possible unique way of
phrasing a specific intent) is a dead end.

What we have nowadays is more like a voice-input command line, with all of the
stiltedness and attention to detail when crafting your input that requires.

~~~
buzzkillington
A voice input command line is exactly what we need.

Unfortunately people want to pretend that natural language parsing can be
solved, which, at least, for English is impossible:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_flies_like_an_arrow;_frui...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_flies_like_an_arrow;_fruit_flies_like_a_banana)

------
ahelwer
There's a particularly good short story dealing with AI personal assistants
shaping people's lives called _The Perfect Match_ by Ken Liu (who once worked
as a software engineer at Microsoft!) It's in an anthology of his short
stories called _The Paper Menagerie_. Check it out, they're all pretty great -
he's also the guy who translated most of the Three Body trilogy into english.

------
_bxg1
The question I always have is, _who asked for all of this_?

Do AI assistants actually make anyone's life easier? Serious question. I
understand the novelty of shouting at your lightbulbs to turn them on and off,
but it feels like that remains the epitome of the life-improvement that these
systems can provide. I've never gotten a good recommendation from software
outside of Pandora, which last I checked doesn't even use AI. I've never found
a real use for Siri or Google Assistant. I briefly considered getting some
Phillips Hues to go with an Alexa that I got for free, before stuffing the
latter in a closet.

Please, for real, weigh in if voice assistants/AI suggestions have
meaningfully improved your life. I'm genuinely curious.

~~~
tingletech
I like being able to set an alarm without getting out of bed, and I'm
extremely nearsighted, so I like being able to check the time and temperature
before I find my glasses. Sometimes, if I can't sleep late at night, it is
nice to put on some music or sounds w/o getting up.

It is handy when cooking, you can set named timers, ask for conversions with
your hands full.

It is also fun at parties, guests can play whatever songs they want (there is
a discount because I have the Amazon music just on that one device).

I listen to the radio on it, and I also get my news from it (I have it
programmed to play the NPR news update and then the Fox News update. They
usually cover the same stuff, but it is interesting to see how they emphasize
different things.)

Alexa seems smarter than Siri or the "hey google" character if you have random
questions and don't want to get out your phone or you already have too many
tabs open.

I've played around with some of the skills, but really only use the timers,
alarms, news, weather, music, streaming radio, and sometimes ask it questions.

~~~
_bxg1
Yeah. It just seems like most of those things could be done with ever-so-
slightly more effort without this technology.

Most new consumer technologies that end up in every home fundamentally change
people's lives. I just don't see that happening here.

We talk about these companies destroying privacy, gaining power on the scale
of nation-states, etc. And we put up with them on some things, because
smartphones and social media are really useful and can be really important to
living modern life. But I just don't get it with the assistants (and really,
Amazon shopping too). We're giving up so much as a society for such a tiny
modicum of extra convenience.

~~~
tingletech
I really like it, and I'm not convinced I'm giving up that much -- and I don't
think there are negative externalities with my use of the device (how am I
hurting anyone else?).

At the end of the day its just a fancy clock radio with okay sound that can
play anything I want to hear without me getting up. But the "assistant" part
of it seems like it is smarter than Siri or hey google.

------
nyxtom
It's not the hyperbole that I find a bit old and tiresome, it's the hubris and
often utopian vision I come across from people in tech in statements like
this. As though there are no possible downsides.

> Prasad’s ultimate vision is to make Alexa available and useful for everyone.
> Even in developing countries, he imagines cheaper versions that people can
> access on their smartphones. “To me we are on a journey of shifting the
> cognitive load on routine tasks,” he says. “I want Alexa to be a
> productivity enhancer … to be truly ubiquitous so that it works for
> everyone.”

~~~
MuffinFlavored
That sounds too positive. It isn’t doomsday enough for the culture here. An
opt-in device you need to purchase, set up, and interact with: the horrors!

~~~
jakeogh
"Alexa", whoever TF that is today, can hear and see your neighbors.

~~~
diggernet
And your guests, who did NOT opt in.

------
goldenshale
The AI fear mongering is getting old. If you don't want an Alexa or Google
Home, then don't buy one. Personally, I ask Google questions all day long and
miss it when I don't have it around. It allows me to learn lots of little
things all of the time, and I would be happy to have contextual suggestions as
long as it was truly trying to be helpful rather than only sell shit.

~~~
tomrod
Do you turn off your Alexa when visitors come over?

Should I ask if I visit, and how would you respond?

~~~
taeric
This is silly. Do you also worry about everyone's phone? It is not uncommon to
see folks accidently activate Siri. Or Google. Usually to laughs. If someone
is wanting to be nefarious... I'd be more worried about the people you have
over to your house, than the people's houses you go to.

~~~
tomrod
I do worry about people's phones.

------
kennu
> From a consumer point-of-view, it’s hard to imagine Alexa becoming so useful
> that we’d come running when it summons us. But Alexa‘s primary mission will
> always be to gather data. Simply put: Amazon, Microsoft, and Google are all
> trillion dollar companies because data is the most valuable resource in the
> world, and Alexa is among the world’s greatest data collectors.

I think the article misses the point here. Alexa is not supposed to summon you
anywhere, it's supposed to be omnipresent like the "computer" in Star Trek.
Being more proactive would just be similar to receiving smartphone push
notifications. Maybe the real worry is about getting too many of those
notifications from Alexa, which is obviously something Amazon needs to be
careful with.

I also couldn't find any mention of Alexa being "among the world's greatest
data collectors" in the referred infographic. I don't doubt that it collects a
lot of data in terms of terabytes since it's all audio, but is there really so
much information content in those commands people occasionally utter to it?

~~~
rco8786
> but is there really so much information content in those commands people
> occasionally utter to it?

You forget that those devices are always on, always listening.

~~~
kennu
Yeah, they're half-on listening for the wakeword, but they don't send the
audio anywhere until you utter it.

~~~
AlexandrB
This is not only something you largely have to trust Amazon's word on but a
limitation that can be removed at any time via OTA update.

~~~
kennu
I don't think that's entirely true. People have analyzed the network traffic
and found it to match the wakewords. The hardware and software architecture
has also been analyzed and my understanding is that the wakeword functionality
is implemented by secondary low-power hardware, which turns on the main system
only after hearing the wakeword. Of course, anything is possible in theory and
I wouldn't be surprised to see some targeted attacks happening occasionally,
but that's pretty different from massive always-on 24/7 audio collection from
all consumers.

Some related links: [https://www.iot-tests.org/2017/06/careless-whisper-does-
amaz...](https://www.iot-tests.org/2017/06/careless-whisper-does-amazon-echo-
send-data-in-silent-mode/)
[https://arxiv.org/abs/1707.08696](https://arxiv.org/abs/1707.08696)

~~~
teucris
Do you think that people care about the difference between only detecting
wakewords and actual continual listening? My understanding from people I’ve
talked to with smart speakers in their homes is that they’ve accepted that
it’s listening all the time.

~~~
kennu
I'm sure people have different feelings about it. My personal view is that you
can listen to anyone using the microphones in their computers and smartphones
anyway (with a targeted attack) and nobody is unhackable.

At the same time I think people have become more privacy-aware in general and
started to demand less bulk data collection. So they might accept certain
risks of getting hacked but not necessarily submit to terms of service that
allow bulk collection.

------
zarriak
Can someone explain to me how we go from assistant that maybe tells me news in
the morning and lets me know if the traffic is bad on my commute to
omnipresence?

I mean sure Alexa skills are just Amazon letting other people figure out how
to design the interface for interacting with Alexa until they lock that down.
It also allows for wonderful ads for local news letting you know they have
programmed an Alexa skill.

This is article is just description that as with every other large digital
assistant team, it is much easier for them to learn how to design the user
experience of the digital assistant by seeing what people do with it rather
than designing literally anything.

I also tend to think that it is now becoming clear that the hard part of
making a digital assistant is designed the user interface and interactions and
not the AI part of it, not to discount the vast amount of work done by all of
these companies.

~~~
danielbarla
> Can someone explain to me how we go from assistant that maybe tells me news
> in the morning and lets me know if the traffic is bad on my commute to
> omnipresence?

I've often thought about what I would like a virtual assistant to do for me,
and it's generally along the lines of "alert me if there's something I should
know about", similar to how a real, live assistant might go about it. I don't
want to know the weather parameters, only if they changed significantly from
yesterday. And delivered at the correct moment for me to do something about
it, not too early, not too late. Same for a commute, but for that, the
assistant would have to know how I commute normally, what my schedule is for
today, when I'm planning to leave. All of this would be a lot more accurate
with omnipresence, as scary as that sounds. The value add is great enough that
in the long run, implementation is almost guaranteed.

------
Lemonlemons
Going from passive to active interaction feels like the logical evolution of
the technology. If Alexa can simply sense if someone is in a room and asks if
they would like something to eat, that will dramatically change the food
delivery industry. The question is: will people find it invasive or upsetting?
My intuition says yes, but the existing popularity of the devices says no.

------
hwestiii
I’ve been reading “The Age of Surveillance Capitalism” recently, and this is
totally the classic case for her argument. We’ve clearly reached the point
where our utility to the technology providers has surpassed their utility to
us. I have no idea why anyone would have one of those things in their home.
It’s no longer a matter of the technology itself, but who is behind it and
what they are doing with it. I don’t like the Bezos drives his warehouse
workers like something out of a Dickens era factory horror show, but the
notion that he’d like to turn me into a “consumption worker” is just too much
to stomach.

~~~
sokoloff
They’re game changing convenience items. “Alexa, play <music description>”
“Alexa, set a timer for 90 seconds.” “Alexa, what’s the weather?” “Alexa, play
‘price it right’”

I don’t expect I’ll order items via Alexa anytime soon, but “she” gets
probably 50 interactions a day. I’m fine with the trade off.

~~~
mathgladiator
Alexa, or as I say 'computer', really helps cook food with timers. I'm kind of
fine with giving up privacy in exchange for useful tools.

------
spsful
> From a consumer point-of-view, it’s hard to imagine Alexa becoming so useful
> that we’d come running when it summons us. But Alexa‘s primary mission will
> always be to gather data. Simply put: Amazon, Microsoft, and Google are all
> trillion dollar companies because data is the most valuable resource in the
> world, and Alexa is among the world’s greatest data collectors.

I know this has nothing to do with the overall theme of the article, but this
is misleading, Microsoft is the only company in that list with a market cap
over 1 trillion. As of the time of writing it is ~1.1T. Apple, on the other
hand, has a market share of ~1.16T, and they have made clear their stance (or
lack thereof) in users' personal data. Just don't like the author's use of
market caps to explain the power of "data" when their argument falls apart
rather quickly.

------
chaostheory
In order for Amazon to accomplish the goal of Alexa becoming proactive,
there’s one major puzzle piece that’s missing: an Amazon phone (unless by some
miracle either Apple or Google gives Alexa tighter integration into their
OS’s)

I predict Amazon will make another attempt at releasing a phone within the
next two years

------
sys_64738
Alexa is banned from my house. No eavesdropping allowed.

~~~
egdod
No smartphones either then? Even when guests come over?

~~~
sgc
I would highly value a phone that had a physical kill switch for mic, camera,
and sensors. The best would be a multi level level kill switch: one for that,
another step to kill mobile, another to kill all networking. Not perfect, but
better than nothing.

------
andreskytt
I’m one of the 8 people on the planet. Simply because Alexa (and Siri) have
real trouble understanding my accent. I don’t fear something I’m at liberty
not using and that’s barely intelligent enough to make sense of what I say.

~~~
tingletech
The other day Alexa asked if I wanted it to learn my voice, so it could
understand me better.

------
lalos
Amazon already invests a lot in this space, that's how you increase profit.
You have to predict who's buying what and where and ship bulk depending on
tendencies. This is just taking it to the personal level.

------
dguo
For many years, I've claimed to some of my friends that the goal of Amazon is
to get to the point where they can order things for us before we even know
that we want them. So Amazon wouldn't even require a confirmation on our part.
We'll just come home to the packages that Amazon has decided that we need or
want.

This situation raises a whole host of issues, and I'm not claiming it'd be a
good thing. It just seems to me like the obvious endgame for Amazon, and I
think it perfectly fits the modern ethos of reducing friction and pursuing
convenience at all costs, including losing our own agency.

~~~
paulcole
Amazon patented this idea years ago

[https://techcrunch.com/2014/01/18/amazon-pre-
ships/](https://techcrunch.com/2014/01/18/amazon-pre-ships/)

~~~
dguo
Ha! Of course they did. Thanks for the link.

------
Narkov
TLDR; Alexa will be proactive rather than just reactive but doesn't give any
realistic examples of what that will look like.

------
bko
> We know how dangerous it is to let bad actors run amok with AI and our data
> – if you need a refresher, recall the Cambridge Analytica scandal.

Maybe I'm missing something, but what does the Cambridge Analytica scandal
have to do with AI?

> Rohit Prasad, the scientist in charge of Alexa‘s development, recently gave
> MIT Technology Review’s Karen Hao one of the most terrifying interviews in
> modern journalism

Is the hyperbole really necessary?

> Rohit Prasad, Alexa’s head scientist, has now revealed further details about
> where Alexa is headed next. The crux of the plan is for the voice assistant
> to move from passive to proactive interactions.

So Alexa will make suggestions or remind you that you need to order toilet
paper. Much like Google's Android greets me with the time it would take me to
get to work every morning without any prompt.

Its really sad that the state of tech reporting is full of this hyperbole and
fear mongering. You can have a real discussion about the dangerous of
technology and erosion of privacy, but this isn't it.

~~~
treis
>Maybe I'm missing something, but what does the Cambridge Analytica scandal
have to do with AI?

I also missed all the bad things that happened because of Cambridge Analytica.
Even if we take their extremely dubious claims about their effectiveness at
face value them running amok resulted in politicians being better able to
target ads. That's not exactly the stuff of nightmares.

~~~
save_ferris
Did you watch the Channel 4 report[0]? The CEO of CA clandestinely advertised
far more than just ads for the reporter posing as a potential client. They are
in the business of winning elections, through whatever means necessary. He
openly talked about things like targeting and entrapping political opponents
with blackmail via "honeypots". His deputies made some really interesting
statements during that report as well. I highly recommend watching the report,
it's a fascinating watch.

Based on what he was caught saying on camera, in addition to his deputies, and
the reporting around their political campaigns in Africa using propaganda that
claimed AIDS would come back if so-and-so were elected, it's not a stretch to
imagine those people doing everything the can, legally and illegally, to sway
an election.

0:
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mpbeOCKZFfQ](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mpbeOCKZFfQ)

~~~
puranjay
But this has always happened in politics. CA just optimized it

~~~
virgilp
-people always travelled, automobile just optimized it -people always produced goods, factories just optimized it -people always used weapons, nuclear energy just optimized them

... never underestimate the impact of “just optimizing” something

------
tracer4201
Nothing that’s actually quoted from the real source in that article is even 1%
as scary or egregious as that clickbait garbage article makes it sound. I’m
not a fan of corporate America or anything like that, but this garbage writing
on HN and front page is sad.

------
oefrha
Reminds me of Silicon Valley S06E02, where _Gates of Galloo_ shows you ads
based on what you're talking about. For instance, a Domino's ad pops up when
it hears/overhears you talking about pizza. Now imagine Alexa doing that
without a wake word; seems like a blessing and a curse -- more of a curse.

------
cutler
While the technocracy is busy trying to convince us that what matters is smart
light bulbs and the prospect of living on Mars the world's ecosystem is on the
point of collapse and a significant percentage of the worlds population have
nowhere decent to live. Wake up, human race! Ask yourself, HN crowd, how many
of the AI jobs you routinely see posted on here are doing anything
significant? Alexa is just a toy.

