this post was submitted on 03 Sep 2024
1120 points (96.6% liked)

Technology

60010 readers
3806 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 317 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

Techbros really went full police state just to deliver ads I wouldn't click on straight into my adblocker

[–] 2pt_perversion 159 points 3 months ago (6 children)

You'd be surprised how many people raw dog the internet.

[–] [email protected] 70 points 3 months ago

It's terrifying

[–] M137 55 points 3 months ago (4 children)

Even people you'd really expect to use adblockers. A good example is right here on Lemmy, people here are generally pretty tech-savvy yet you get threads with lots of people complaining about ads. This has been a weird lesson as I get older, seeing that most people somehow don't even think about lifting a finger to fix things they see as problems, they really just complain and then do absolutely nothing to help themselves. It's the same with if someone mentions something they don't know what it is, instead of taking 5 seconds to just look it up they comment to ask about it and then never reply to people answering their question. I'm certain that it's very common to have some weird need to make others do work for you, they don't actually care about finding out what something is or how to do something to fix a problem, they just care about making others spend any kind of effort for them.

[–] 2pt_perversion 26 points 3 months ago (2 children)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 22 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (2 children)

I have a friend that pays Google a YouTube tax every month... He tells me he wants to support the creators.

I'm just kind of sad for him... I tried to explain direct donations were a million times more effective, but he clearly just doesn't want to learn how to use an adblocker.

This guy is like 30 years old.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 123 points 3 months ago (4 children)

Recent versions of Android make it much more difficult for a background app to access the microphone. There will be a notification if any background app is using the mic or camera.

[–] ChillPill 130 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (8 children)

Google's "Now playing" feature constantly listens to what's going on in the background to show you what songs are playing. They claim this is done with a local database of song "fingerprints". The feature does not show the microphone indicator because: "...Now Playing is protected by Android's Private Compute Core..."

I'm not saying that other, non-google, app do this to my knowledge; but the fact that this is a thing is honestly a bit scary.

Edit: screenshot of the "Now Playing" feature

1000009252

[–] Pichu0102 42 points 3 months ago (2 children)

For what it's worth, I did just test it with airplane mode and it still correctly identified the song playing. So at the very least, it's not lying about using a local database to identify songs, at least when it is offline.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (7 replies)
[–] Magister 22 points 3 months ago (4 children)

Yup, the green dot top right

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] [email protected] 16 points 3 months ago

Yeah, this sounds like a shareholder soapy titwank speech to me.

They're bullshitting everyone including the people we hate.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 93 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (5 children)

"Meta does not use your phone's microphone for ads and we've been public about this for years," the statement read.

Meanwhile:

[–] billiam0202 181 points 3 months ago (24 children)

Not defending Facebook, but if you record a video with sound, then the FB app has to have permission to record your audio.

That said, delete Facebook. Fuck Zuck.

load more comments (24 replies)
[–] [email protected] 33 points 3 months ago (2 children)

That is not the same thing as listening in the background.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Retro_unlimited 25 points 3 months ago

Meta said it does not, but what about 3rd parties…

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 59 points 3 months ago (1 children)

"Meta does not use your phone's microphone for ads and we've been public about this for years," the statement read. "We are reaching out to CMG to get them to clarify that their program is not based on Meta data."

Ah, yes. The tried and true defense of "we've denied it for years and continue to deny it" must be credible coming from a source as trustworthy as Facebook. I hear they're planning on holding a press conference to pinky swear they're not listening to the microphone they demand access to in order to show you ads that make them money.

[–] [email protected] 44 points 3 months ago (3 children)

FWIW, this was debunked when CMG originally made the claim. It was a marketing guy overselling their product and they had to correct their statement. They use the same info data brokers collect, and phones actively listening to you is not true.

[–] [email protected] 21 points 3 months ago

Even what they said could be true without applying to phones. They said "smart devices" a lot. They never said "smart phone".

There are a lot of IoT devices, some of which have microphones, a lot less secure than either iPhone or Android.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] FlyingSquid 54 points 3 months ago (1 children)

They really need to name-and-shame beyond "Facebook Partner" considering we're talking about fucking Cox Media Group.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] werefreeatlast 52 points 3 months ago (4 children)

Dildos, lots of dildos! I'm just gonna repeat that while I'm driving to see if I start getting Google ads for dildos.

[–] [email protected] 30 points 3 months ago (1 children)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 25 points 3 months ago

If that works, you should try it with a product that you aren't interested in too and compare the results.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] aesthelete 46 points 3 months ago (3 children)

It remains funny to me that futurism.com became mostly about covering the dystopia we live in.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Chocrates 41 points 3 months ago (6 children)

I am so numb to outrage that this just seems... Meh. What happened to me.

[–] NikkiDimes 22 points 3 months ago

It's the world we live in. It's very much intentionally designed to make you complacent.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] [email protected] 40 points 3 months ago (14 children)

I remember reading some time ago that "the idea (of phones listening to everything you say to serve ads) makes no economic sense, because it'd be too expensive to run"

Looks like it actually isn't "too expensive" to run in the end.

load more comments (14 replies)
[–] [email protected] 40 points 3 months ago (2 children)

Most of the non tech people reaction

[–] [email protected] 32 points 3 months ago (4 children)

But before that, when it was not acknowledged by social media, it was more like ' you're paranoid. And you think you're that important that they listen to you? Common, get back to reality '

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Snapz 37 points 3 months ago (6 children)

What's the last "bombshell scandal that would ruin a company" that actually ruined a company?

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] [email protected] 33 points 3 months ago (14 children)

I highly doubt that they actually managed to do this, at least any time recently.

As another commenter noted, Android alerts you when an app is accessing the microphone in the background, and it would also absolutely destroy the phones battery life more than the FB app currently does. The only way that we have the "Hey Google/Siri" command prompts active all the time is with custom hardware not available to the apps, and certainly not without Android knowing about it.

Maybe they actively listen while the app is open, but even then I think recent Android/iOS would let you know about that.

[–] ChillPill 20 points 3 months ago

Google's "Now playing" feature constantly listens to what's going on in the background to show you what songs are playing. They claim this is done with a local database of song "fingerprints". The feature does not show the microphone indicator because: "...Now Playing is protected by Android's Private Compute Core..."

I'm not saying that other, non-google, app do this to my knowledge; but the fact that this is a thing is honestly a bit scary.

load more comments (13 replies)
[–] Suavevillain 33 points 3 months ago

This is why I don't like the push of everything needing an app. I sure do wish people in congress cared about this type of privacy issues the way they did Tiktok.

[–] Subverb 30 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (21 children)

These companies absolutely do use your microphone to listen.

My wife and I have tested this and you can too.

Have a conversation near your phones about purchasing something offbeat. We used a kitchen garbage disposal in our test. Talk about them for a few minutes, about needing to buy one, different brands, etc.

Almost immediately you'll be served garbage disposal adds.

load more comments (21 replies)
[–] gcheliotis 20 points 3 months ago (34 children)

A market agency claiming they do something of the sort isn’t proof that conversations are being monitored en masse. Security researchers can and probably have tested for this and found no clear, verifiable evidence, otherwise we would have known. Also, this stuff can be blocked at the OS level and I find it hard to imagine (esp. without solid proof) that Google or Apple would jeopardize their reputations to this extent by enabling such unauthorized listening in on users’ conversations.

Of course it’s good to keep watching this space but we shouldn’t jump to conclusions.

load more comments (34 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›