skillzdadirecta Posted September 4 Share Posted September 4 Yeah i'm with @SuperSpreader on this too. There's no doubt in my mind that in some cases, some of these apps are picking up keywords in conversations and then using that information to market to the user. Like it's not an accident that as soon as I hang up the phone in a conversation where I casually mention electric toothbrushes, I see a bunch of banner ads for electric toothbrushes in the browser in my phone. it's crazy that people find this hard to imagine. 1 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uaarkson Posted September 4 Share Posted September 4 Facebook knew who my crack dealer was before the police did. I didn’t even know the guy’s real name until he popped up as a friend recommendation. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elbobo Posted September 4 Share Posted September 4 46 minutes ago, skillzdadirecta said: Yeah i'm with @SuperSpreader on this too. There's no doubt in my mind that in some cases, some of these apps are picking up keywords in conversations and then using that information to market to the user. Like it's not an accident that as soon as I hang up the phone in a conversation where I casually mention electric toothbrushes, I see a bunch of banner ads for electric toothbrushes in the browser in my phone. it's crazy that people find this hard to imagine. I was noticing this over 5 years ago. I remember doing an experiment with my friends where we just sat around and talked about fishing for 10 minutes, 2 of us had fishing gear related ads the next. None of us fish at all and would not have anything in our search history to trigger this. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
b_m_b_m_b_m Posted September 4 Author Share Posted September 4 My Alexa can’t even pick up when I say it’s code word half the time but the phone in my pocket can, and doing so without attracting attention that your mic is on? cmon guys 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SuperSpreader Posted September 4 Share Posted September 4 1 minute ago, b_m_b_m_b_m said: My Alexa can’t even pick up when I say it’s code word half the time but the phone in my pocket can, and doing so without attracting attention that your mic is on? cmon guys maybe you don't enunciate when you speak Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris- Posted September 4 Share Posted September 4 8 minutes ago, elbobo said: I was noticing this over 5 years ago. I remember doing an experiment with my friends where we just sat around and talked about fishing for 10 minutes, 2 of us had fishing gear related ads the next. None of us fish at all and would not have anything in our search history to trigger this. Targeting attributes can be pretty wide ranging, especially once you start to look at interests/lifestyle (e.g. if your friends are football fans, the targeting for those ads might have been broad enough to include anyone identified as an 'American sports fan'). Plus, the cost per impression for that kind of hyperspecificity would probably be absolutely astronomical. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SuperSpreader Posted September 4 Share Posted September 4 These guys are in on it. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spork3245 Posted September 4 Share Posted September 4 One time I farted with my phone in my back pocket and I started getting ads for carbon inserts for underwear 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jason Posted September 4 Share Posted September 4 1 hour ago, Uaarkson said: Facebook knew who my crack dealer was before the police did. I didn’t even know the guy’s real name until he popped up as a friend recommendation. They definitely harvest contacts lists, I've also been given friends recommendations for people I had no other connection to (mutual FB friends etc) shortly after exchanging numbers with them. And it didn't happen until right after I installed WhatsApp. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chakoo Posted September 4 Share Posted September 4 1 hour ago, Jason said: They definitely harvest contacts lists, I've also been given friends recommendations for people I had no other connection to (mutual FB friends etc) shortly after exchanging numbers with them. And it didn't happen until right after I installed WhatsApp. before they allowed users to hide their phone numbers, you could look people up by just purely searching with it. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skillzdadirecta Posted September 4 Share Posted September 4 So wait, are we doubting that this tech exists, or that it's being used? I mean the company is allegedly bragging about the tech in this report but you guys are like "Nah"? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
b_m_b_m_b_m Posted September 4 Author Share Posted September 4 2 minutes ago, skillzdadirecta said: So wait, are we doubting that this tech exists, or that it's being used? I mean the company is allegedly bragging about the tech in this report but you guys are like "Nah"? Don’t believe anything from a sales person really 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skillzdadirecta Posted September 4 Share Posted September 4 Just now, b_m_b_m_b_m said: Don’t believe anything from a sales person really Or my own personal experiences and the experiences of people I know I guess... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
b_m_b_m_b_m Posted September 4 Author Share Posted September 4 41 minutes ago, skillzdadirecta said: Or my own personal experiences and the experiences of people I know I guess... You remember those ads because it is something you talked about. But you don’t notice or ignore the ads you get that aren’t about things you’ve talked about. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uaarkson Posted September 4 Share Posted September 4 I’ve definitely had shit pop up for me immediately after talking about it and with no other mention of it anywhere online in text or audio. 🤷♀️ 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uaarkson Posted September 4 Share Posted September 4 With that said, I also totally and completely believe in aliens 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kal-El814 Posted September 5 Share Posted September 5 37 minutes ago, b_m_b_m_b_m said: You remember those ads because it is something you talked about. But you don’t notice or ignore the ads you get that aren’t about things you’ve talked about. Or the umpteen times you talk about very specific stuff you never see ads for. 1 hour ago, skillzdadirecta said: So wait, are we doubting that this tech exists, or that it's being used? I mean the company is allegedly bragging about the tech in this report but you guys are like "Nah"? Do I think that Meta is listening to devices of people who do not allow their apps to access their mics? No. There are so many other vectors for them to get you and as someone who did graduate work on memory and whose best friend is a college professor who still researches it, this specific scenario is almost perfectly priced to successfully activate confirmation bias. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
legend Posted September 5 Share Posted September 5 Let me see if I can sum up for the people who still believe this. 1. If they were doing this, we would have expected to find lots of hard technical evidence of it by now from lots of different possible sources. It would be bizarre for everyone to miss this given the degree of scrutiny from so many sources. 2. Do *not* underestimate how much information can be extracted from various different sources. It is often scary how much can be extracted from multiple seemingly low-information sources. Even scientists who attempt to anonymize data get nailed with it actual revealing information through cross references. If you need help internalizing this fact, remember that this dude exists. 3. Beware the base rate fallacy. It is a common cognitive bias to only remember the interesting occurrences as proof for a belief without counting the number of times it doesn't occur. Coincidences happen all the time -- it would be more strange if you never had any coincidences to remark on. This is a significant bias that leads people to all kinds of bad premature conclusions. A significant reason we have developed rigorous data tracking in science is precisely because we're all so fucking bad at this as humans. In short, there are lot's of reasons that your anecdotes would exist without this technology being used, and if the technology was in use we would expect far more evidence that just the anecdotes. While I'm not going to tell you with certainty it's not happening, I will tell you there is not a good argument for it right now. Its odd of being true given the provided "evidence" is about the same as they are without any "evidence." 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SuperSpreader Posted September 5 Share Posted September 5 39 minutes ago, legend said: Let me see if I can sum up for the people who still believe this. 1. If they were doing this, we would have expected to find lots of hard technical evidence of it by now from lots of different possible sources. It would be bizarre for everyone to miss this given the degree of scrutiny from so many sources. 2. Do *not* underestimate how much information can be extracted from various different sources. It is often scary how much can be extracted from multiple seemingly low-information sources. Even scientists who attempt to anonymize data get nailed with it actual revealing information through cross references. If you need help internalizing this fact, remember that this dude exists. 3. Beware the base rate fallacy. It is a common cognitive bias to only remember the interesting occurrences as proof for a belief without counting the number of times it doesn't occur. Coincidences happen all the time -- it would be more strange if you never had any coincidences to remark on. This is a significant bias that leads people to all kinds of bad premature conclusions. A significant reason we have developed rigorous data tracking in science is precisely because we're all so fucking bad at this as humans. In short, there are lot's of reasons that your anecdotes would exist without this technology being used, and if the technology was in use we would expect far more evidence that just the anecdotes. While I'm not going to tell you with certainty it's not happening, I will tell you there is not a good argument for it right now. Its odd of being true given the provided "evidence" is about the same as they are without any "evidence." I'm not reading all that 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
legend Posted September 5 Share Posted September 5 2 minutes ago, SuperSpreader said: I'm not reading all that At 286 words, it might take you a whole minute! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SuperSpreader Posted September 5 Share Posted September 5 Just now, legend said: At 286 words, it might take you a whole minute! Pass. I know what I saw! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
legend Posted September 5 Share Posted September 5 Just now, SuperSpreader said: Pass. I know what I saw! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skillzdadirecta Posted September 5 Share Posted September 5 3 hours ago, b_m_b_m_b_m said: You remember those ads because it is something you talked about. But you don’t notice or ignore the ads you get that aren’t about things you’ve talked about. Thanks for explaining to me how my mind works 3 hours ago, Uaarkson said: I’ve definitely had shit pop up for me immediately after talking about it and with no other mention of it anywhere online in text or audio. 🤷♀️ NO YOU DIDN'T! 3 hours ago, Kal-El814 said: Do I think that Meta is listening to devices of people who do not allow their apps to access their mics? No. How many people unknowingly allow these apps access to their mics when they frys install an app without realizng the implications or without fully reading the T.O.S.? I'm guessing a LOT. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jason Posted September 5 Share Posted September 5 17 minutes ago, skillzdadirecta said: How many people unknowingly allow these apps access to their mics when they frys install an app without realizng the implications or without fully reading the T.O.S.? Giving the app permission to turn on the microphone doesn't prevent the "YOUR MICROPHONE IS ON" indicator from showing once it does. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SuperSpreader Posted September 5 Share Posted September 5 The app permissions restrictions options are newer. They didn't exist the way they do today ~2yr ago. I'm sure a lawsuit forced it. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cusideabelincoln Posted September 5 Share Posted September 5 If the Facebook app isn't actively using the mic all the time, Google Assistant assuredly is and most people leave that on. How much is Google collecting outside of "Hey Google" asks? Or how many times does the assistant turn on randomly because it thinks it hears the keyword? Social Media apps are then using that data. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skillzdadirecta Posted September 5 Share Posted September 5 3 minutes ago, cusideabelincoln said: Google Assistant assuredly is NO IT ISN'T you silly paranoid rube! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
legend Posted September 5 Share Posted September 5 2 hours ago, cusideabelincoln said: If the Facebook app isn't actively using the mic all the time, Google Assistant assuredly is and most people leave that on. How much is Google collecting outside of "Hey Google" asks? Or how many times does the assistant turn on randomly because it thinks it hears the keyword? Social Media apps are then using that data. These applications do deserve more consideration than the facebook app. At the beginning, the Amazon team for Alexa did not let the system send data unless it was prompted, but I have no idea if they maintained that. For cellphones, there is the added issue that sending the data over the network constantly as it continually spied would be a bigger battery drain and the network traffic would be easier to identify that it was doing that. So I'd still be skeptical they're actively spying when you don't prompt it, but I'd be less skeptical than I am with the facebook app. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chakoo Posted September 5 Share Posted September 5 There are tons of ways people can verify their stupidity suspicions with actual data. It's how I made smartwatches and IoT devices talk/launch Chromecast apps long before they were supported features. Monitoring and sniffing out network traffic in your home is not a difficult thing to do if you're so paranoid. People are just not imaginative enough to know how much shit can be figured out with the data they willfully share publicly all day every day. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kal-El814 Posted September 5 Share Posted September 5 2 hours ago, cusideabelincoln said: If the Facebook app isn't actively using the mic all the time, Google Assistant assuredly is and most people leave that on. How much is Google collecting outside of "Hey Google" asks? Or how many times does the assistant turn on randomly because it thinks it hears the keyword? Social Media apps are then using that data. 2 hours ago, skillzdadirecta said: NO IT ISN'T you silly paranoid rube! I don’t think anyone is saying that services with permissions to listen are in fact not listening. Merely that “I saw something happen” is not evidence for “X happened because Y” especially when X may happen for plenty of other reasons. Again and to @chakoo’s point, it wouldn’t be especially difficult to determine if Meta is phoning home when you’re connected to a WiFi you manage but nobody has been able to do so. So this specific thing is either not happening or it IS happening but also selectively NOT happening under specific circumstances… which makes it less likely. This of course doesn’t make it impossible, just less likely than other, easier ways for targeted ads to show up on your feed. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kal-El814 Posted September 5 Share Posted September 5 Just to be clear, my point isn’t “I think this thing is impossible.” No. Just unlikely as there’s been no real evidence provided. If you’d asked me if VW diesels change how their engines work based on whether or not the car thinks its emissions are being tested, I’d have said no, almost certainly not. Buuuuuuut you know… eventually someone showed up with actual receipts. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skillzdadirecta Posted September 6 Share Posted September 6 Well lookee dere! Ford just patented a system for cars that does exactly what the D1P brain trust of mensa members is telling me isn't possible! Access Denied WWW.MOTORTREND.COM Quote Yeah, you read the headline right. Ford has patented a system that, per the filing, would use several different sources of information to customize ad content to play in your car. One such information stream that this hypothetical system would use to determine what sort of ads to serve could be could be the voice commands you’ve given to the car. It could also identify your voice and recognize you and your ad preferences, and those of your passengers. Finally, it could listen to your conversations and determine if it’s better to serve you a visual ad while you’re talking, or an audio ad when there’s a lull in the conversation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jason Posted September 6 Share Posted September 6 2 minutes ago, skillzdadirecta said: Well lookee dere! Ford just patented a system for cars that does exactly what the D1P brain trust of mensa members is telling me isn't possible! Access Denied WWW.MOTORTREND.COM So you just haven't read a single fucking thing we've repeatedly said about why this wouldn't work in secret, on a cellphone. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skillzdadirecta Posted September 6 Share Posted September 6 6 minutes ago, Jason said: So you just haven't read a single fucking thing we've repeatedly said about why this wouldn't work in secret, on a cellphone. Oh I read it.. I just don't believe you. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jason Posted September 6 Share Posted September 6 1 minute ago, skillzdadirecta said: Oh I read it.. I just don't believe you. Okay. So instead you're taking a completely different scenario and using it to say we were wrong about the original scenario. Smart. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.