Amazon's Alexa now at Marriott hotels(uk.reuters.com)
uk.reuters.com
Amazon's Alexa now at Marriott hotels
https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-amazon-com-marriott-intnl/amazons-alexa-will-now-butler-at-marriott-hotels-idUKKBN1JF16V
91 comments
> It's one thing to trust Amazon or Google, but now you also have to trust the hotel and its staff, the physical security of the device, and all the previous guests of the room.
You already had to do the physical trust thing. These devices are a new challenge because they could be remotely compromised.
You already had to do the physical trust thing. These devices are a new challenge because they could be remotely compromised.
>I can't wait until we all find out these things have all been systematically rooted and collecting blackmail on folks.
Back in the day you had to be important to get that kind of treatment and usually only the FBI would do it.
Back in the day you had to be important to get that kind of treatment and usually only the FBI would do it.
> Back in the day you had to be important to get that kind of treatment and usually only the FBI would do it.
This what's known as the Democratization of technology. Now days everyone is important and receives equal treatment!
This what's known as the Democratization of technology. Now days everyone is important and receives equal treatment!
I mean, you already do have to trust the hotel staff and all previous occupants of the room. Do you sweep every hotel room for bugs?
The difference is that if a bug is found it would be a big deal. They can now listen in and claim ignorance.
> It's one thing to trust Amazon or Google, but now you also have to trust the hotel and its staff, the physical security of the device, and all the previous guests of the room.
With miniature cameras being widely available for years now what exactly is new?
With miniature cameras being widely available for years now what exactly is new?
This pushes the acceptance much further.
"It's ok to do this. Look! Everybody does it. Why are you always so paranoid? If you have nothing to hide why are you fighting it?!"
"It's ok to do this. Look! Everybody does it. Why are you always so paranoid? If you have nothing to hide why are you fighting it?!"
Well it's not like this is a new platform designed for Marriott, it's an extremely popular product millions of people have in their homes and offices. It is already accepted.
Objection, appeal to popularity
"Millions" sounds overwhelming until expressed as a proportion of the population of the USA, Australasia, Canada and EU: just shy of a billion.
These devices have been accepted and adopted by a small minority of people to whom they are available.
"Millions" sounds overwhelming until expressed as a proportion of the population of the USA, Australasia, Canada and EU: just shy of a billion.
These devices have been accepted and adopted by a small minority of people to whom they are available.
"People, eat shit! Billions of flies can't be wrong".
Meme in Germany...
Meme in Germany...
People do stuff in hotels they wouldn't dream of doing at their homes or workplaces though?
What could possibly ever go wrong putting a third party corporate spying machine in each room? It's unbelievable how much blind and naive trust there is.
> It's unbelievable how much blind and naive trust there is
Do you sweep every hotel room you use for listening devices?
Do you sweep every hotel room you use for listening devices?
I assume the answer is no, but sweeping for listening devices is different than ignoring a listening device which is clearly sitting right in front of you.
Personally, I have no problem with it, but I can see why others would be concerned.
Personally, I have no problem with it, but I can see why others would be concerned.
No, because there's one in my pocket.
Yea, I can’t believe all these people walking around with these spying machines in their pockets. Subjecting the rest of us to their second hand spying. Oh wait, were we talking about Alexa or cellphones/smartphones?
Personally, I disable "Hey, Siri" and other watchword interfaces.
That said, I think that if someone complains about X, and you reply "But what about Y?!" you're not really addressing their concern.
That said, I think that if someone complains about X, and you reply "But what about Y?!" you're not really addressing their concern.
I don't understand this. Presumably you disable "Hey Siri" because you are concerned it is doing more than Apple claims, but if that's the case then why do you trust that disabling it actually disables the parts they don't tell you about?
Reminds me of https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whataboutism
If a person complains about X while actively doing/using Y, then they are not really addressing their concern either.
People with smart phones don't follow me into my hotel room.
> Yea, I can’t believe all these people walking around with these spying machines in their pockets
Me either. Your comment sounds sarcastic, but there are people (me included) that find this concerning (not unbelievable though; the incentives are clear).
What I find most frustrating is that we've reached the point where even privacy advocates, speaking to privacy advocates at privacy advocacy events (e.g. Open Rights Group) just assume that everyone's carrying a phone, posting to social media, etc. :(
Me either. Your comment sounds sarcastic, but there are people (me included) that find this concerning (not unbelievable though; the incentives are clear).
What I find most frustrating is that we've reached the point where even privacy advocates, speaking to privacy advocates at privacy advocacy events (e.g. Open Rights Group) just assume that everyone's carrying a phone, posting to social media, etc. :(
It was sarcastic, I’ll apologize for that. It’s mostly a frustrated response to all the “they’re listening” comments on every tech thread ever lately. The truth is I think they’re right. The problem I see is most of these same people are using Facebook, Amazon, Google search, Gmail, Windows, Smartphones, Verizon, or one of the many products or services that brazenly and openly hoover up every bit of information for the purpose of selling it or marketing back to them.
The expectation to privacy is nearly dead and we’re concerned about all the wrong things. You could make the conscious decision to try and be off-grid, but even that won’t keep you anonymous. Next family BBQ you go to, your family member snaps a picture uploads it to Facebook and tags you in it. Then suddenly it’s reccomending them to be friends with your coworkers because you were tagged in a work photo uploaded to a coworkers Facebook page.
Companies are actively collecting astronomical amounts of data, some data they don’t even know how they’re going to use yet. But you don’t get a decision about any of it. At this point I think some of these companies know more about us than we know about ourselves.
Government agencies are going to non-governmental agencies to get information they couldn’t legally collect themselves.
So yes, I was being sarcastic. I just wish we’d focus on how to take back control of our data and worry less about how they’re collecting it. I’m sure the majority of us are freely giving it away through our choice of services and products. Why would they risk getting caught spying?
The expectation to privacy is nearly dead and we’re concerned about all the wrong things. You could make the conscious decision to try and be off-grid, but even that won’t keep you anonymous. Next family BBQ you go to, your family member snaps a picture uploads it to Facebook and tags you in it. Then suddenly it’s reccomending them to be friends with your coworkers because you were tagged in a work photo uploaded to a coworkers Facebook page.
Companies are actively collecting astronomical amounts of data, some data they don’t even know how they’re going to use yet. But you don’t get a decision about any of it. At this point I think some of these companies know more about us than we know about ourselves.
Government agencies are going to non-governmental agencies to get information they couldn’t legally collect themselves.
So yes, I was being sarcastic. I just wish we’d focus on how to take back control of our data and worry less about how they’re collecting it. I’m sure the majority of us are freely giving it away through our choice of services and products. Why would they risk getting caught spying?
Is there any way to opt-out of having these in the room?
I'm not comfortable sleeping in a room with one of these devices.
I'm not comfortable sleeping in a room with one of these devices.
Other's have said you could unplug it, but you may also find it to be the easiest way to do certain things, so you could also mute it so it's available in case you want it.
Of course you'd have to trust the mute function, but Amazon is actually pretty strict about honoring their explicit privacy guarantees (like when you push the mute button it's actually muted).
Of course you'd have to trust the mute function, but Amazon is actually pretty strict about honoring their explicit privacy guarantees (like when you push the mute button it's actually muted).
On the minus side, when muted the entire LED ring glows bright red, which is not ideal in a room you're trying to sleep in... so you need to cover it up too.
You could cover it with an anvil...
Yea, when muted, not even the wake word triggers voice recording.
> Is there any way to opt-out of having these in the room?
The ideal way, if it is an option for you, is to opt-out of that hotel altogether. Telling them why may be even better.
The ideal way, if it is an option for you, is to opt-out of that hotel altogether. Telling them why may be even better.
I'd say rather than just unplugging it, don't stay at Marriott. Don't encourage them with your money.
You can call ahead or tell them during check in that you don't want it in your room or just unplug it. There is no charge for any of these options. They're very sensitive to customer perceptions and don't want to force anything on anybody.
Ultrasonics exist to overload microphones but I always thought of then as acoustical coupling of interference which I would think the FCC would frown upon but maybe that's a stretch.
[deleted]
Unplug it?
BTW the last few times I've checked in to a Marriott, the TV has been on, playing some kind of ad trying to sell me a temporary Netflix subscription or something. I find this incredibly annoying. I never use the TV in a hotel room, and I'd like to find a hotel chain that has no TVs in the rooms period.
Friendly reminder about the time Marriott fired customer support employee to get back in China's good books
https://work.qz.com/1220881/marriott-hotels-fired-an-hourly-...
https://work.qz.com/1220881/marriott-hotels-fired-an-hourly-...
> ... Jones, who worked on social media accounts for the company, had “liked” the tweet, on behalf of Marriott International... The problem? It had been posted by a Tibetan separatist group...
This reads to me like the employee went rogue and took politically sensitive stance on behalf of the company. I'd label that brand damaging negligence and it seems like fair grounds for dismissal. Maybe there's more to it.
This reads to me like the employee went rogue and took politically sensitive stance on behalf of the company. I'd label that brand damaging negligence and it seems like fair grounds for dismissal. Maybe there's more to it.
One like doesn't sound rogue. If the dude'd gone out of his way to like every claim of Tibet being its own country, sure.
In this case though I'd imagine he saw a "Thanks Marriott" and liked it because that's the thing companies do. I've had companies miss my oozing-in-sarcasm messages and like them in the past even.
The thing to think about is how much time does he really have per action? If it was you on personal twitter, minutes per action. As a customer support person answering hundreds of messages a day, probably closer to a second or two per action
In this case though I'd imagine he saw a "Thanks Marriott" and liked it because that's the thing companies do. I've had companies miss my oozing-in-sarcasm messages and like them in the past even.
The thing to think about is how much time does he really have per action? If it was you on personal twitter, minutes per action. As a customer support person answering hundreds of messages a day, probably closer to a second or two per action
China would probably object if the guy "liked" a tweet by the Dalai Lama in which he said how much he liked his stay at a Marriott.
I'm not sure it would be readily apparent if a Tibet-oriented Twitter account was that of a "separatist" group, let alone how radical or violent that group might be. (Assuming that the group was in any way problematic in an objective sense rather than just hurting China's imperialistic feels.)
I'm not sure it would be readily apparent if a Tibet-oriented Twitter account was that of a "separatist" group, let alone how radical or violent that group might be. (Assuming that the group was in any way problematic in an objective sense rather than just hurting China's imperialistic feels.)
Is there a reason for why major tech companies are heavily pushing their smart speakers? Their seems to be a lot more marketing push going on than when they were pushing out new phones/tablets/hardware etc in the past (Amazon fire, Google Pixelbook, Google Chromecast, Amazon Roku etc.)
A few reasons come to mind:
- landgrab. You're very unlikely to have more than one smart speaker system in your phone, so once you've got an Alexa, you'll probably pick up some Alexa Dots rather than get a Google Home. This applies to an entire household in the way that even cellphone choices don't.
- lock-in. The web is all pesky and open, whereas these voice interface platforms are perfectly locked in for ultimate profit. And you can't get the web on them! Ideal.
- landgrab. You're very unlikely to have more than one smart speaker system in your phone, so once you've got an Alexa, you'll probably pick up some Alexa Dots rather than get a Google Home. This applies to an entire household in the way that even cellphone choices don't.
- lock-in. The web is all pesky and open, whereas these voice interface platforms are perfectly locked in for ultimate profit. And you can't get the web on them! Ideal.
I think it's because it helps the big tech companies sell more stuff later on.
If you have a smart speaker, you are probably more likely to be a Prime member, Spotify subscriber, and make purchases with Amazon or Google Express via the speaker.
If you have a smart speaker, you are probably more likely to be a Prime member, Spotify subscriber, and make purchases with Amazon or Google Express via the speaker.
Passive data collection on a massive scale
This is the correct interpretation: Google and Amazon thrive on data.
Probably for a similar reason that they push their own app stores. You get used to using something, depend on it. After the lock-in period, they are in a much better position to offer you new services that you simply can't refuse.
[deleted]
Machine learning.
More data = more learning. Even bad data is valuable.
It's how Google keeps Google Voice and Gmail free.
More data = more learning. Even bad data is valuable.
It's how Google keeps Google Voice and Gmail free.
Voice interfaces have huge potential. I think the potential for a truly amazing voice interface / AI (think JARVIS from Iron Man) outweighs the potential of hardware.
Remember the old joke, "In Soviet Russia, TV watches you"?
Now, in the West, people actually pay for devices that surveil them.
Now, in the West, people actually pay for devices that surveil them.
On the one hand, I could see this being incredibly useful. Program it to answer all sorts of typical guest questions including those specific to the property/location. On the other hand, I can't really argue with those who don't feel comfortable with the idea--which is probably why this has taken so long.
Also could mean Marriott being black listed by any company working with CNI and the civil service.
I like Marriott hotels in general. This just means I'm going to unplug the device, remove its batteries, and wrap it in foil as soon as I check in.
[Note to self: Pack foil on next trip.]
[Note to self: Pack foil on next trip.]
> I like Marriott hotels in general.
IMO, you should stop supporting Marriott if at all possible. Google "marriott tibet tweet" and choose your outlet of choice (less about the specific firing and more about censorship cowering sans transparent statement). I also like Nestle candy in general, but try not to eat it.
IMO, you should stop supporting Marriott if at all possible. Google "marriott tibet tweet" and choose your outlet of choice (less about the specific firing and more about censorship cowering sans transparent statement). I also like Nestle candy in general, but try not to eat it.
If I'm understanding this correctly - an employee of Marriott liked a tweet praising Marriott for listing Tibet as a country in a survey, so China tells Marriott to apologize, hold the employee responsible, and suspends Marriott's website and app in China (their second largest market, with over 300 hotels).
Marriott then fires the employee and releases a statement on twitter saying "We don’t support separatist groups that subvert the sovereignty and territorial integrity of China".
That hardly seems like a reason to stop supporting Marriott. What would you have wanted them to do differently?
Marriott then fires the employee and releases a statement on twitter saying "We don’t support separatist groups that subvert the sovereignty and territorial integrity of China".
That hardly seems like a reason to stop supporting Marriott. What would you have wanted them to do differently?
> What would you have wanted them to do differently?
Not let a government set their principles on what they can and can't do on Twitter. This is really simple. If they principally believe that they were wrong to like that tweet, then I disagree with their principles. If they were being pressured to react to it by a government, then I disagree with them cowering to any government about a liked tweet. Either way, they did wrong and they weren't very clear about what was requested by a country's government and what wasn't.
No different than Apple being forced to put icloud servers in control of non-Apple company in China...all you have to do is be transparent so I can disagree with your principles, unless your principles are money only, at which point I can disagree with that too. (and no, don't pretend like all of us with companies only care about money)
So, to answer the question, they should have ignored the request and been clear about what was asked of them. Since they didn't, they probably saved a lot of money even if they lost mine.
Not let a government set their principles on what they can and can't do on Twitter. This is really simple. If they principally believe that they were wrong to like that tweet, then I disagree with their principles. If they were being pressured to react to it by a government, then I disagree with them cowering to any government about a liked tweet. Either way, they did wrong and they weren't very clear about what was requested by a country's government and what wasn't.
No different than Apple being forced to put icloud servers in control of non-Apple company in China...all you have to do is be transparent so I can disagree with your principles, unless your principles are money only, at which point I can disagree with that too. (and no, don't pretend like all of us with companies only care about money)
So, to answer the question, they should have ignored the request and been clear about what was asked of them. Since they didn't, they probably saved a lot of money even if they lost mine.
That is a bad look for Marriott, for sure, but if you disqualify establishments for unfairly firing a low-level employee, you should get used to travelling a lot less. This particular situation just happened to be well publicised.
> That is a bad look for Marriott, for sure, but if you disqualify establishments for unfairly firing a low-level employee, you should get used to travelling a lot less. This particular situation just happened to be well publicised.
I put this in parentheses: "less about the specific firing and more about censorship cowering sans transparent statement". I disqualify establishments without principles in situations like this. Very simple. It's why I alluded to Nestle as a company too. The they-all-do-bad argument doesn't mean we can't exercise any judgement within.
I put this in parentheses: "less about the specific firing and more about censorship cowering sans transparent statement". I disqualify establishments without principles in situations like this. Very simple. It's why I alluded to Nestle as a company too. The they-all-do-bad argument doesn't mean we can't exercise any judgement within.
Just tear off a piece from your hat.
If you ask at the front desk they will happily remove it from your room or change room to one without it. Actually you could nag about it and look annoyed so maybe you can get better room from them or some freebies.
I think they will remove those from rooms as soon as people who nag about anything to get freebies will realize it is good point to get some.
I think they will remove those from rooms as soon as people who nag about anything to get freebies will realize it is good point to get some.
I stayed at a hotel which had Amazon echo in the room a few weeks ago. It was awesome to ask it to play various kinds of music while we lounged by the pool. Or to check the weather forecast for the next day.
I enjoyed it enough that we bought an echo dot the day after we arrived home.
Personally I think you all need to lighten up. It would be 100x easier for government, previous guests or the hotel to install hidden microphones or video than to hack into the Echo. Amazon have sufficient commercial interests that personally I'd be sure enough that they'll behave properly. I'm not planning a military coop or anything though.
I enjoyed it enough that we bought an echo dot the day after we arrived home.
Personally I think you all need to lighten up. It would be 100x easier for government, previous guests or the hotel to install hidden microphones or video than to hack into the Echo. Amazon have sufficient commercial interests that personally I'd be sure enough that they'll behave properly. I'm not planning a military coop or anything though.
So basically all Marriott hotels will be bugged for whatever host country they are in. I can’t see conducting sent I’ve business in them. Now they don’t have to bother doing targeted spying becuase now it’ll be everywhere.
There's something a little sad about this. Unlike at home, hotels are a place where you already have a voice assistant - the concierge, that'll give you restaurant recommendations, pick up your laundry and call a cab for you. And do a much better job than any automated voice assistant will do. But I don't doubt for a second that this will eventually be paired with a strong rollback of real humans manning phone lines.
Sigh.
Sigh.
There's already a very easy and commonly deployed way to save on a concierge: don't have one.
"Alexa, get my car" to alert the valet would be awesome.
Or you could pick up the phone in the room and push the one button for that function.
I stayed in a hotel recently (Hilton, I think) where the valet function was done via text message.
I stayed in a hotel recently (Hilton, I think) where the valet function was done via text message.
Yes, voice assistants don't do anything that you can't accomplish by pressing buttons or using your phone. That's not the point.
"Alexa, remind me next vacation never to stay at Marriott hotels ever again."
Ah man, this is terrible. I go to hotels to get away from tech!
Ok... That's one more thing I need to be sure I unplug or cover when I'm in the room. Although all of this compounds the reasons I don't stay in hotel rooms, and opt for Airbnb whenever possible. That, again, is another place for concern, but at least I can get to the circuit breaker and flip it off to disrupt things, and run a network sniffer to look for hidden cameras. Hell hath no fury as a paranoid woman traveling alone.
If you're that concerned about cameras you are much better staying in a corporate owned hotel than an Airbnb. If you do ever find anything you will actually be able to sue and cash in:
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/08/business/media/erin-andre...
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/08/business/media/erin-andre...
But in an Airbnb, not only can I sue, but someone will go to jail. https://nypost.com/2017/12/04/people-keep-finding-hidden-cam...
[deleted]
Amazon now collecting your personal conversations at Marriott hotels
Me and my wife both agreed (on separate occasions) that "Alexa, turn the living room/bedroom on" feel so missing at hotels.
disc: Amazon employee
disc: Amazon employee
I know it's of little solace to many, but the truth is, I mostly feel safe in knowing that whoever is collecting data on me, I'm not really worth spying on.
The thing is you might be interesting just because of that. In case some bad actors (government, gangsters, etc.) would need some scape goat they have much more means to make you into one because by coincidence you might be close to some unwanted activity.
People get convicted for things they did not do all the time by mistakes. Now it can be a lot easier to get someone convicted by planting stuff on their devices. So bad guys point you and how are you going to convince judge that you are innocent, everyone is saying he is innocent.
People get convicted for things they did not do all the time by mistakes. Now it can be a lot easier to get someone convicted by planting stuff on their devices. So bad guys point you and how are you going to convince judge that you are innocent, everyone is saying he is innocent.
When I was a homemaker, that was kind of my line of thinking. Then my life changed and that theory stopped working so well for me.
YMMV.
YMMV.
> whoever is collecting data on me, I'm not really worth spying on.
What makes you think that? This isn't a team of private investigators paid a hefty fee to watch you 24/7; this is fully automated mass-surveillence. It would be more cost/effort to stop spying on you, since that would require maintaining a blacklist.
Besides which, if any of the following apply to you then you are worth spying on:
- You spend money on products and services
- You are eligible to vote in elections, referenda, etc.
- You communicate with people who do the above
An example of this is the heavily data-driven and audience-tailored presidential campaign of Donald Trump. "Everyday people" made up a large proportion of their target demographic. Even if such data gathering (spying) had no effect on the outcome, it was still part of the winning strategy, which makes it an attractive service for companies to offer, and incentivises an arms race to push it much more extensively in the future.
What makes you think that? This isn't a team of private investigators paid a hefty fee to watch you 24/7; this is fully automated mass-surveillence. It would be more cost/effort to stop spying on you, since that would require maintaining a blacklist.
Besides which, if any of the following apply to you then you are worth spying on:
- You spend money on products and services
- You are eligible to vote in elections, referenda, etc.
- You communicate with people who do the above
An example of this is the heavily data-driven and audience-tailored presidential campaign of Donald Trump. "Everyday people" made up a large proportion of their target demographic. Even if such data gathering (spying) had no effect on the outcome, it was still part of the winning strategy, which makes it an attractive service for companies to offer, and incentivises an arms race to push it much more extensively in the future.
I can't wait until we all find out these things have all been systematically rooted and collecting blackmail on folks.
It's one thing to trust Amazon or Google, but now you also have to trust the hotel and its staff, the physical security of the device, and all the previous guests of the room.