My friends and I got into a debate the other night, ranking the Big Five in order of trust. While nobody really reached a consensus on what company belonged at the top (Apple was probably closest), we all agreed that Facebook was at the bottom of the list, and that they were way, way below everyone else.
There's honestly no way I would ever let Facebook have a device like this in my home (and for those wondering, I don't have Facebook on my phone).
Apple is a hardware and cloud company. Their incentive is to get you to buy phones and computers and lock you into their ecosystem. Some shameful behavior, but nothing that's not to be expected. Trustworthy, but in need of the occasional reprimanding.
Amazon is a middle man company. They connect sellers to buyers and interact with you to get you to use their platform. Over the past ten years they've dipped into a bunch of other markets as well, but I don't think it's affected why they collect information so far. Untrustworthy, minorly invasive, but not malicious. Yet.
Google wants to know everything about you so they can profit from your data when selling advertisements, and do so by inserting themselves into everything you do. Your calendar, your email, your browser; any place where they can squeeze in a call to their servers. Untrustworthy and highly invasive, but not malicious.
Facebook, like Google, wants to know everything about you so they can sell that data to advertisers. But whereas Google attempts to integrate itself into your natural flow of life, Facebook tries to change your behavior so that you interact with it more often. Facebook actually wants to control you. Untrustworthy, highly invasive, and malicious.
Microsoft is in the process of reinventing itself and it's too early to tell what sort of trust it will deserve, if any. But I don't think anyone is preaching optimism.
It's really amusing that Microsoft gets higher regard than Amazon. Did everyone forget about Win10 telemetry that you can't disable (without having an Enterprise license)? Ads in the OS itself?
The exact order of trustworthiness for the Big Five is irrelevant, because it rounds down to zero for all of them. They all have an NSA backdoor through PRISM - this trumps all other privacy concerns.
It seriously boggles my mind. Snowden revealed that these companies have all given direct access to their data to the NSA. The public's response is to forget about within a few years and to go out an buy microphones and cameras from these companies to put into their homes.
Met someone who works at Apple over the holidays and he had trouble believing that I trusted Apple over any of the other big tech companies mentioned, but wasn't able to delve into his reasoning.
> There's honestly no way I would ever let Facebook have a device like this in my home
Dave Egger's excellent "The Circle" is a well-written, engrossing and quick book about "what if" Facebook becomes even more a part of people's lives with a personal surveillance device. Do not watch the movie, read the book.
> "According to people familiar with Facebook’s plans, Portal will be equipped with a wide-angle lens that is capable of recognizing individual faces and associating them with their Facebook accounts."
In addition to Facebook being viewed as the least trustworthy as mentioned in other comments, let's just casually add in facial recognition cameras into our homes too!
There are plenty of reasons to be wary of home devices no matter the company, but holy fuck I wouldn't touch this one with a 10-foot pole.
As an alternative to this, I love Google's personal recognition solution of recognizing voice with a small model so that while it can distinguish between (I think up to 10?) people, it is in no way good enough to fingerprint your voice.
I’m not sure I would trust Facebook with an always-on wide-angle lens and microphone in my house. I can’t imagine the next-level of creepy ads that will enable. It’s creepy enough when they start showing ads for physical stores I’ve visited.
Oddly enough Facebook has the lowest quality of ads in my opinion. For the large amounts of data they have on me, they don't seem to utilize it effectively
Now here's a device that actually is a straight wiretap.
I wonder if they just hope that people don't care, or if they are actually going to design it in some kind of not-a-wiretap way (hopefully following Google/Amazon's example)
The catch is that it automatically builds a social graph based on recognizing the faces of people who visit you. No facebook account and don't pose for pictures? No problem, we'll just install facial recognition cameras in the houses of your friends.
> Of course the catch would be it watches you, knows you by your face, and builds your advertising profile.
And it would be enhanced to detect your emotional state from facial expressions, tone of voice, who you're with, your relationship with them, etc., and then suggest something (addictive) to cheer you up or keep you more excited. If someone didn't consider Facebook as being akin to an addictive drug, this one would prove them wrong once and for all! The sales pitch would be some drivel about meaningful connnections, interactions and experiences.
While I understand that my smartphone can be used as a listening device, the day when I will purchase a dedicated wire tap for my house will be never. I've been to people's houses that have them and sure they're fun when you're having some beers and want to hear a song I don't mind taking 2 seconds to manual select a song on my phone to keep a hot mic out of my house.
That sounds like an absurd waste of time. Anyone who wants to do most of that can already do so, just they won't have the "luxury" of Facebook monetizing it.
I don’t see yet how this can possibly be more than a clone of the Echo Show, but twice as expensive and with Facebook-y features. I don’t spot anything particularly significant in this article that differentiates it — even the leaked image looks similar to the hardware. I have to assume most of the price difference would come down to screen size or resolution.
In any case, it’s very interesting to think about Facebook getting into video as they are leaning into Live already. I wonder if there is also more Live programming products in the works as they continue to ramp up against YouTube, and explore content creation... but still, I don’t know many people now who video chat via FB (or any FB properties), but I’m on iOS and pretty much exclusively use FaceTime for that so I’m in a bubble there.
Comical that they will charge $500. The data (revenue) they gain from me owning a portal I'd imagine would off set the cost to build and develop this product.
Seriously Facebook guys, do you check nothing? There is no way the internet isn't going to connect wide angle lenses, invasion of privacy and a psychopathic if lovable computer program with Aperture Science. I hope that's what you're going for.
No, they know FaceOS and Fire(sale)phone did poorly but that Amazon is getting the side-angle with Echo/Show so they figured they might get a good 2nd place with the "I don't care if it's creepy" crowd.
That's a brilliant product.
Assuming it's reliable and user friendly, that's the kind of product I'd give my parents (or even grand mother) so that they can easily video chat with the rest of the family.
I gave my 90 year old grandmother an Echo Show for Christmas and she loves it. My main goal was video chat (which she can also initiate herself), but she’s actively using it as a radio, weather station and calendar for the trash pick up.
To help her remember the commands I made a reference sheet with the most common phrases, but what mainly helped her was to think of talking to Alexa as if she was talking to a dog: Giving clear, loudly spoken commands.
Just wondering: Have you looked into the Echo Show or Spot?
Also, my theory is this story is coming out intentionally ahead of CES where Google will likely show a similar product to both this "Portal" thing and Amazon's Echo Show/Spot.
[+] [-] sharkweek|8 years ago|reply
There's honestly no way I would ever let Facebook have a device like this in my home (and for those wondering, I don't have Facebook on my phone).
[+] [-] ysavir|8 years ago|reply
? Microsoft ?
Apple is a hardware and cloud company. Their incentive is to get you to buy phones and computers and lock you into their ecosystem. Some shameful behavior, but nothing that's not to be expected. Trustworthy, but in need of the occasional reprimanding.
Amazon is a middle man company. They connect sellers to buyers and interact with you to get you to use their platform. Over the past ten years they've dipped into a bunch of other markets as well, but I don't think it's affected why they collect information so far. Untrustworthy, minorly invasive, but not malicious. Yet.
Google wants to know everything about you so they can profit from your data when selling advertisements, and do so by inserting themselves into everything you do. Your calendar, your email, your browser; any place where they can squeeze in a call to their servers. Untrustworthy and highly invasive, but not malicious.
Facebook, like Google, wants to know everything about you so they can sell that data to advertisers. But whereas Google attempts to integrate itself into your natural flow of life, Facebook tries to change your behavior so that you interact with it more often. Facebook actually wants to control you. Untrustworthy, highly invasive, and malicious.
Microsoft is in the process of reinventing itself and it's too early to tell what sort of trust it will deserve, if any. But I don't think anyone is preaching optimism.
[+] [-] r00fus|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jamoes|8 years ago|reply
It seriously boggles my mind. Snowden revealed that these companies have all given direct access to their data to the NSA. The public's response is to forget about within a few years and to go out an buy microphones and cameras from these companies to put into their homes.
[+] [-] rm999|8 years ago|reply
Apple > Microsoft >> Google == Amazon >> Facebook
Facebook is dead last by a mile.
[+] [-] stevenwoo|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] notatoad|8 years ago|reply
Among the general public, Amazon and Google are significantly more trusted than the others: https://www.theverge.com/2017/10/27/16550640/verge-tech-surv...
[+] [-] wallflower|8 years ago|reply
Dave Egger's excellent "The Circle" is a well-written, engrossing and quick book about "what if" Facebook becomes even more a part of people's lives with a personal surveillance device. Do not watch the movie, read the book.
https://www.amazon.com/Circle-Dave-Eggers/dp/159413961X
[+] [-] unknown|8 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] adjkant|8 years ago|reply
In addition to Facebook being viewed as the least trustworthy as mentioned in other comments, let's just casually add in facial recognition cameras into our homes too!
There are plenty of reasons to be wary of home devices no matter the company, but holy fuck I wouldn't touch this one with a 10-foot pole.
As an alternative to this, I love Google's personal recognition solution of recognizing voice with a small model so that while it can distinguish between (I think up to 10?) people, it is in no way good enough to fingerprint your voice.
[+] [-] ThrustVectoring|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] minton|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] paulie_a|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ArchReaper|8 years ago|reply
I wonder if they just hope that people don't care, or if they are actually going to design it in some kind of not-a-wiretap way (hopefully following Google/Amazon's example)
[+] [-] chrischen|8 years ago|reply
Of course the catch would be it watches you, knows you by your face, and builds your advertising profile.
[+] [-] ThrustVectoring|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] newscracker|8 years ago|reply
And it would be enhanced to detect your emotional state from facial expressions, tone of voice, who you're with, your relationship with them, etc., and then suggest something (addictive) to cheer you up or keep you more excited. If someone didn't consider Facebook as being akin to an addictive drug, this one would prove them wrong once and for all! The sales pitch would be some drivel about meaningful connnections, interactions and experiences.
[+] [-] sandov|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] soared|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] rwc|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] sjwright|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] alistproducer2|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] krisives|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] hbosch|8 years ago|reply
In any case, it’s very interesting to think about Facebook getting into video as they are leaning into Live already. I wonder if there is also more Live programming products in the works as they continue to ramp up against YouTube, and explore content creation... but still, I don’t know many people now who video chat via FB (or any FB properties), but I’m on iOS and pretty much exclusively use FaceTime for that so I’m in a bubble there.
[+] [-] soared|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] cryptoz|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] BigSlowTarget|8 years ago|reply
Seriously Facebook guys, do you check nothing? There is no way the internet isn't going to connect wide angle lenses, invasion of privacy and a psychopathic if lovable computer program with Aperture Science. I hope that's what you're going for.
[+] [-] tinyhouse|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] tw04|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] r00fus|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] aviv|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Jyaif|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] bartman|8 years ago|reply
To help her remember the commands I made a reference sheet with the most common phrases, but what mainly helped her was to think of talking to Alexa as if she was talking to a dog: Giving clear, loudly spoken commands.
[+] [-] hbosch|8 years ago|reply
Also, my theory is this story is coming out intentionally ahead of CES where Google will likely show a similar product to both this "Portal" thing and Amazon's Echo Show/Spot.
[+] [-] bigphishy|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] sandov|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] tzakrajs|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] myaso|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] throwawaymanbot|8 years ago|reply
[deleted]