Alexa, what are you doing with kids' data?(commercialfreechildhood.org)
commercialfreechildhood.org
Alexa, what are you doing with kids' data?
https://commercialfreechildhood.org/blog/alexa-what-are-you-doing-kids-data
86 comments
If adults don't understand the technology and kids don't consent, isn't that exactly a scenario where we should at least protect the children, given that its widely accepted in most countries that children can't actually enter commercial relationships on their own?
> If adults don't understand the technology and kids don't consent, isn't that exactly a scenario where we should at least protect the children, given that its widely accepted in most countries that children can't actually enter commercial relationships on their own?
Or more accurately kids can't consent. This is the argument I've used for my kids against family members who had a hard time understanding not plastering them on social media. Basically we told everyone in the family that our kids images, names, DoB, whereabouts and anything else about them should not be posted in any form or fashion. I'd then go on to position it from my kids point of view: what if they don't consent later in life and those posts somehow impact them negatively at that time? Do you [family member] want to take on that you were the only one to choose for them? I am their custodian and doing my due diligence to keep their digital footprint to a minimum until they have the capacity to make those choices on their own behalf. I feel like there are lawsuits all around this that will be cropping up in the next decade which may shy people away from the unfiltered social media perspective many run with today.
Or more accurately kids can't consent. This is the argument I've used for my kids against family members who had a hard time understanding not plastering them on social media. Basically we told everyone in the family that our kids images, names, DoB, whereabouts and anything else about them should not be posted in any form or fashion. I'd then go on to position it from my kids point of view: what if they don't consent later in life and those posts somehow impact them negatively at that time? Do you [family member] want to take on that you were the only one to choose for them? I am their custodian and doing my due diligence to keep their digital footprint to a minimum until they have the capacity to make those choices on their own behalf. I feel like there are lawsuits all around this that will be cropping up in the next decade which may shy people away from the unfiltered social media perspective many run with today.
OTOH, if you are plastering yourself all over social media and other kids parents are doing the same with their children, not including your child in your posts can feel extremely alienating to them, and make them feel like you do not care about them or want to be seen with them. And when they grow up, they may resent you for not even putting up even one picture of them with you.
The moral of that story is to beware: kids may not always share your values and by doing what you think is best you may be doing harm. They may not understand consent, but they will understand what it looks like when a parent doesn’t give a shit about them.
The moral of that story is to beware: kids may not always share your values and by doing what you think is best you may be doing harm. They may not understand consent, but they will understand what it looks like when a parent doesn’t give a shit about them.
If you talk to your kids they are surprisingly intelligent and can comprehend this. I do my best to bridge the line of alienation and acceptable use of technology which leverages other forms of inclusion and sharing that doesn't require Facebook, Instagram, Snapchat, etc.
And to your point, kids don't always share values of the parent which is why they don't have final say. Your implication that a parent that does more to protect their child "doesn't give a shit about them" clearly showcases your agenda and/or unfounded assertion.
And to your point, kids don't always share values of the parent which is why they don't have final say. Your implication that a parent that does more to protect their child "doesn't give a shit about them" clearly showcases your agenda and/or unfounded assertion.
Id adults don't understand the tech, they can't consent either. It's a scenario where we should be protecting everybody.
Pushing for children protection first would not be wrong, but would be counter productive.
Pushing for children protection first would not be wrong, but would be counter productive.
While protecting the kids would be nice, it results in a large inconsistency to apply it here, given the level of control we allow parents to have over their kids in many areas. For example, parents have near-complete jurisdiction over the diet of their children and can therefore cause significant health issues at their own discretion (or just due to lack of nutritional knowledge). This is (at least at the current moment) a significantly larger issue for kids than if Amazon has personal data on them or not. Accordingly, it seems strange for us to want the government to intervene with respect to data on children, but not with respect to a child's diet.
Government can and mostly do intervene in respect to child diet as well.
I said 'near-complete' in attempt to include edge cases. Most parents definitely make their own decisions as to what to feed their kids rather than letting the government make them, just as they decide what to teach their kids.
It wildly depends on where you live I guess, but I expect a large portion of kids to eat lunch at school, and school meals are regulated.
Adults are presumed to able to give informed consent, given a clear explanation of how that data will be used.
The time for regulating data collection for minors at a Federal level is now[1]. I went to purchase an Amazon Echo a couple of days ago, and was surprised to see the children's version on sale for less than the current Echo Dot. It's currently listed as unavailable[2], perhaps because of the findings explored in this article.
I wouldn't be surprised if they were trying to liquidate.
I think it was $39.95 for the children's version and $49.95 for the regular version.
There were a few pieces of dark UX/UI that hid a couple of very important differentiations that made me nope out.
1. The service automagically came with something called Amazon FreeTime[3]. It's advertised as free everything for your child; books, tv, music, etc. in exchange, of course it would kindly listen and "learn" to offer better things. Nope.
2. The device was last generation's hardware with a nice cover. It wasn't even technologically up to snuff with the current Echo Dot.
Basically I wrote it off as a kid's tracking and advertising device and purchased a regular new one.
Glad my Spidey senses were tingling.
[1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advertising_to_children#Histor...
[2] - https://www.amazon.com/Echo-Kids-smart-speaker-Alexa/dp/B077...
[3] - https://www.amazon.com/Amazon-FreeTime-Unlimited-Monthly-Sub...
I wouldn't be surprised if they were trying to liquidate.
I think it was $39.95 for the children's version and $49.95 for the regular version.
There were a few pieces of dark UX/UI that hid a couple of very important differentiations that made me nope out.
1. The service automagically came with something called Amazon FreeTime[3]. It's advertised as free everything for your child; books, tv, music, etc. in exchange, of course it would kindly listen and "learn" to offer better things. Nope.
2. The device was last generation's hardware with a nice cover. It wasn't even technologically up to snuff with the current Echo Dot.
Basically I wrote it off as a kid's tracking and advertising device and purchased a regular new one.
Glad my Spidey senses were tingling.
[1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advertising_to_children#Histor...
[2] - https://www.amazon.com/Echo-Kids-smart-speaker-Alexa/dp/B077...
[3] - https://www.amazon.com/Amazon-FreeTime-Unlimited-Monthly-Sub...
> Basically I wrote it off as a kid's tracking and advertising device and purchased a regular new one. Glad my Spidey senses were tingling.
Do you actually believe the regular one will be much better with respect to tracking and advertising? I have no such confidence. I think they'll just categorize the use and still associate everything they do with children.
Do you actually believe the regular one will be much better with respect to tracking and advertising? I have no such confidence. I think they'll just categorize the use and still associate everything they do with children.
I mentioned the second point because it appeared, to me anyway, that this was a separate service aimed specifically at the children's device; separate from my already assessed knowledge of Amazon, AWS, Prime, and their other affiliated (and paid) offerings.
> The time for regulating data collection for minors at a Federal level is now
Are you aware of the Children's Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA)? It was passed in 1998, and this article specifically says that they believe Amazon is in violation of it.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Children's_Online_Privacy_Prot...
Are you aware of the Children's Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA)? It was passed in 1998, and this article specifically says that they believe Amazon is in violation of it.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Children's_Online_Privacy_Prot...
I am.
I guess it wasn't clear that I was also implying there may be something wrong when one of the largest companies in the world can sell ?? number of devices aimed specifically at children, without this regulation being enforced/checked for ?? amount of time.
Either enforcement, or regulation failed. I think we've got a lot of mechanisms for enforcement, as this article is bringing light to the necessity of.
So, perhaps the aforementioned "regulation" is not enough, and properly written regulation that can be enforced with some regularity and haste is required considering this is for children.
I guess it wasn't clear that I was also implying there may be something wrong when one of the largest companies in the world can sell ?? number of devices aimed specifically at children, without this regulation being enforced/checked for ?? amount of time.
Either enforcement, or regulation failed. I think we've got a lot of mechanisms for enforcement, as this article is bringing light to the necessity of.
So, perhaps the aforementioned "regulation" is not enough, and properly written regulation that can be enforced with some regularity and haste is required considering this is for children.
[deleted]
My poor mother bought all of her adult children smart speakers for Christmas. None of us accepted them. People just don't realize what's going on behind the scenes.
Heh. My mom did the same thing a couple of years ago—the Google Home Mini.
We played some trivia for a while but it sits there unplugged until we want to use it... which is rarely. The last time has to have been over a year ago...
We played some trivia for a while but it sits there unplugged until we want to use it... which is rarely. The last time has to have been over a year ago...
My Google Home Mini (that I got for Christmas) sits unplugged but it is a very good speaker even if I turn off the mic.
If I can just get myself to accept that the mic is off when I have turned it off I might actually start using it more.
BTW: Has anyone verified this?
If I can just get myself to accept that the mic is off when I have turned it off I might actually start using it more.
BTW: Has anyone verified this?
without altering the hardware there might be no way to verify anything very meaningful
recent post-move housewarming gifts:
- amazon fire stick
- wifi thermostat serving a web api
- cam/mic security system accessible via http(sans ssl)
- fruit basket with as yet inexplicable plastic-encased antennae
- amazon fire stick
- wifi thermostat serving a web api
- cam/mic security system accessible via http(sans ssl)
- fruit basket with as yet inexplicable plastic-encased antennae
The fruit basket is the weirdest one. WTF could it be? Do you have any link to where you can get one, or any more information on it? Sounds like a fun writeup.
They also made this video which is helpful: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mlraB-zflv8
The video shows that data wasn't deleted on the Echo Dot even after a parent tried to delete it. Which is bad. (Though there's a bigger point they are making— that parents should be able to control privacy for their children, not Amazon.)
The video shows that data wasn't deleted on the Echo Dot even after a parent tried to delete it. Which is bad. (Though there's a bigger point they are making— that parents should be able to control privacy for their children, not Amazon.)
If I had an echo I'd make it respond to "Jeff Bezos", just to remind myself of who I'm really inviting into my life like that.
"Jeff Bezos, can you put some mood music on?"
"Jeff Bezos, get me a good Mac and Cheese recipe"
"Jeff Bezos, I'd like to order some Tide pods"
"Jeff Bezos, can you put some mood music on?"
"Jeff Bezos, get me a good Mac and Cheese recipe"
"Jeff Bezos, I'd like to order some Tide pods"
That is paranoid and absurd. It's much more likely that the person "reviewing the audio data for quality assurance" will be some gig economy worker hired through Mechanical Turk.
Yes. But also: Parents, why are you letting your kids play with hardware long known to upload and preserve this data?
If anything I think adults should be more concerned about their own privacy than kids. WGAF that Uncle Sam/Aunt Madison Ave knows that Timmy binged 10 episodes of Spongebob. Adults on the other hand have more damaging secrets like affairs or confidential technical knowledge.
I kinda get that you don't want AI to learn how to manipulate kids but still this is a larger concern than just 'think of the children'.
I kinda get that you don't want AI to learn how to manipulate kids but still this is a larger concern than just 'think of the children'.
[deleted]
and kids just enter fake ages so they get treated like adults anyways (complete privacy breach)
[deleted]
I was old enough but always entered 1900-01-01 or the earliest year allowed, now more likely to be 1920.
maybe the data was cached to server it quicker?
> Alexa, what are you doing with kids' data?
Uhhh, collecting, storing and trying to make profit with it at some point in time? I still wonder why people don't realise this when they buy such system, it's so obvious.
Uhhh, collecting, storing and trying to make profit with it at some point in time? I still wonder why people don't realise this when they buy such system, it's so obvious.
While it's easy to believe free services like Google are siphoning your data, it's harder to connect that a device you pay for is collecting and selling your data.
I find the best way to convey to people the reason why these smart speakers and devices are so cheap, and seem to be on sale almost perpetually.
A growing number of smart devices are being sold at below-cost, using a combination of data harvesting, ads and a proprietary app/skills store to make a profit for the maker after the sale.
A growing number of smart devices are being sold at below-cost, using a combination of data harvesting, ads and a proprietary app/skills store to make a profit for the maker after the sale.
The price doesn't actually matter - if they can make more money with ads/data harvesting, they will. When has a corporation ever said no to free money?
(Yes it happens but it's damn rare)
(Yes it happens but it's damn rare)
I am not for regulation normally, but I feel we may need to protect our personal data with some type of oversight. The amount of information and personal data these companies hold is frightening.
Don't forget about the ginormous TCL Roku televisions with "opt-in" Active Content Recognition. Now everyone feels they can afford a 70" TV and don't think twice about it.
I mean, they think that because they can. It's a great feature.
Except they don't understand the full scope of the purchase. All of their viewing data is now being recorded.
I can afford tons of things when they are subsidized. That's why coal, etc. still seem so sustainable and we think we can afford them as well.
I can afford tons of things when they are subsidized. That's why coal, etc. still seem so sustainable and we think we can afford them as well.
I think I am fully on-board with giving people the same option Kindle does:
* Offer price with view tracking
* Offer price without view tracking
I cannot argue that this shouldn't be clearly visible, and I think, for the benefit of the consumer this can't be a ridiculous matrix of all the different kinds of tracking. Opt-in or pay the higher price. That sounds fair. But "make it so no one can opt-in": no. That is oppressive nonsense from rich people who would go "How much does a TV cost, man? Ten thousand dollars? Just buy it."
* Offer price with view tracking
* Offer price without view tracking
I cannot argue that this shouldn't be clearly visible, and I think, for the benefit of the consumer this can't be a ridiculous matrix of all the different kinds of tracking. Opt-in or pay the higher price. That sounds fair. But "make it so no one can opt-in": no. That is oppressive nonsense from rich people who would go "How much does a TV cost, man? Ten thousand dollars? Just buy it."
Kindle offers advertisements at a discount. I purchased one such model.
AFAIK Amazon is not keeping a remote log of every file accessed on my Kindle. Can you point to something saying otherwise?
> I cannot argue that this shouldn't be clearly visible, and I think, for the benefit of the consumer this can't be a ridiculous matrix of all the different kinds of tracking.
Visibility isn't really an issue either way if it's achieved normality.
AFAIK Amazon is not keeping a remote log of every file accessed on my Kindle. Can you point to something saying otherwise?
> I cannot argue that this shouldn't be clearly visible, and I think, for the benefit of the consumer this can't be a ridiculous matrix of all the different kinds of tracking.
Visibility isn't really an issue either way if it's achieved normality.
I said "like the Kindle" in that it's clearly advertised what you're getting in the two different flavours. I didn't mean they track you. I was hoping to emphasise the clarity.
The issue is that anyone who willingly participates in Active Content Recognition systems has made themselves ineligible for revolution.
If they ever start watching anti-government propaganda, the government will know.
We've all read 1984. We know what happens.
If they ever start watching anti-government propaganda, the government will know.
We've all read 1984. We know what happens.
The problem will always be your fellow man who believes the revolution is evil. I am convinced of this. In the face of that, this stuff is nothing.
1984 was the mid 20th century take. I'm pretty sure any current take would be focused on people's desire for authoritarianism.
1984 was the mid 20th century take. I'm pretty sure any current take would be focused on people's desire for authoritarianism.
So we should just go ahead and put always-on vidscreens in everyone's house then? Because people don't know any better?
It's an education problem. Pointing at an ignorant man and then claiming he should get what he desires is ridiculous.
It's an education problem. Pointing at an ignorant man and then claiming he should get what he desires is ridiculous.
It shouldn't be. At this point you need a really good reason to assume a company isn't storing any information it can collect, whether they are monetizing it now or not.
It's been proven the information has value. Unless there's some regulation or contract preventing them from doing so, they're going to collect it in the vast majority of cases. Whether they already made money on a service getting the information is irrelevant.
It's been proven the information has value. Unless there's some regulation or contract preventing them from doing so, they're going to collect it in the vast majority of cases. Whether they already made money on a service getting the information is irrelevant.
It's necessary to educate people that while they're purchasing* the hardware, they're receiving the service "for free" (AKA, supported by ads in some way, shape, or form) via the hardware.
*purchasing may not even be fully accurate here since loads of companies are starting to treat it like a pay-once licensing fee allowing you to use hardware that they own in perpetuity or until that hardware is no longer supported by the manufacturer.
*purchasing may not even be fully accurate here since loads of companies are starting to treat it like a pay-once licensing fee allowing you to use hardware that they own in perpetuity or until that hardware is no longer supported by the manufacturer.
That’s true. I’m still having trouble internalizing that my multi-hundred-dollar Bose headphones are spying on me. I’ve yet to delete the app, though I should.
Honestly, this is past the shark-jumping point. When I saw that Bose thread yesterday, my initial reaction was "what in the actual fuck?!". I would have never expected a set of wireless headphones to spy on users. I thought this has optics way too close to actual wiretapping for companies to do that, but I guess I should never be surprised by how low adtech industry can get.
Agreed. Considering the headphones have a mic and are used -for sending and receiving the contents of actual phone calls- it’s hard for me to imagine how prying into their data isn’t wiretapping.
Kind of confuses me when people say Apple isn't collecting your data.
Are these people unaware or fanboys?
Are these people unaware or fanboys?
"I bugged my own house, and now my house is bugged!"
Exactly. Don't want it? Then don't buy it. It's really that simple.
> It's really that simple.
No, it isn’t. If people buy these products knowing the terms of the trade, that’s one thing. But a lot of people don’t. This is why we have disclosure regulations.
No, it isn’t. If people buy these products knowing the terms of the trade, that’s one thing. But a lot of people don’t. This is why we have disclosure regulations.
You know how FB can create shadow profiles of people that have never had an FB account but were tagged on photos or comments? Same principle applies.
You may not buy an Alexa speaker, but if you're in the room having a conversation with someone who does, your name and personal information could leak as well. Same goes if the conversation was on a phone loudspeaker.
The voice data would have limited usability in its present state, but as Alexa's network effects improve, the signal to noise ratio will only get better.
You may not buy an Alexa speaker, but if you're in the room having a conversation with someone who does, your name and personal information could leak as well. Same goes if the conversation was on a phone loudspeaker.
The voice data would have limited usability in its present state, but as Alexa's network effects improve, the signal to noise ratio will only get better.
Until the alternatives disappear.
The "think of the children" nonsense was so annoying as a child. Paternalistic bullshit that tried to stop me from using the Internet meaningfully. Fortunately, everyone decided to comply with pointless age gates and, as a child, I had a full and complete experience.
I'm a well-balanced individual now and I always wondered how people who were once kids and had loads of fun would lock down shit to other kids when they grew older.
Now I see this shit live. We used to think it was the previous generation that mollycoddled kids and instead we now have the perpetual hovermom because people are flipping out over this "think of the children" crap.
Imagine if I had had to have had an ID mailed in to register on sites just to discuss sci-fi just because someone might mention sex there. Wow, not living in America, I might never have even been able to discuss anything.
I'm a well-balanced individual now and I always wondered how people who were once kids and had loads of fun would lock down shit to other kids when they grew older.
Now I see this shit live. We used to think it was the previous generation that mollycoddled kids and instead we now have the perpetual hovermom because people are flipping out over this "think of the children" crap.
Imagine if I had had to have had an ID mailed in to register on sites just to discuss sci-fi just because someone might mention sex there. Wow, not living in America, I might never have even been able to discuss anything.
Children are under our protection, and don't yet have full rights. It's annoying to tweens, but not a bad thing.
Personally due to age I didn't get on the internet until age ~25 or so. And what I saw there I'll never "unsee" if you catch my drift. Would I choose expose that to my ten year old self now? Definitely not. It's just not necessary.
We may have survived intact, but the better question is, was it beneficial to you? I can't say that seeing those things at ten would have improved my life in any meaningful way. Didn't even mention the predator angle, while overblown, is a thing. Data harvesting FTW.
Less is more.
Personally due to age I didn't get on the internet until age ~25 or so. And what I saw there I'll never "unsee" if you catch my drift. Would I choose expose that to my ten year old self now? Definitely not. It's just not necessary.
We may have survived intact, but the better question is, was it beneficial to you? I can't say that seeing those things at ten would have improved my life in any meaningful way. Didn't even mention the predator angle, while overblown, is a thing. Data harvesting FTW.
Less is more.
Of course "less is more" for everyone else. That's been the mantra of every group of people restricting rights to individuals. "Don't play video games. It'll make you violent" ; "You can't watch that movie. It'll make you a rapist" ; "Don't read that book. It'll turn you into a traitor"
No, thanks. I had the Internet from the time I was 10. It made me the capable person I am, gave me the incredible career I have today, and showed me all the things I could become. Horizons were crossed that I never dreamed possible. Many of the people I knew never saw these things and they would kill to have my life. I am absolutely committed to a free and open Internet.
Of course, the puritans are against this. The puritans are establishmentarians and authoritarians. You can never do anything because they're protecting you. Oh so very precious, the protection. No, enough with the shackles. The next generation has a right to grow without you cutting their legs out from under them.
No, thanks. I had the Internet from the time I was 10. It made me the capable person I am, gave me the incredible career I have today, and showed me all the things I could become. Horizons were crossed that I never dreamed possible. Many of the people I knew never saw these things and they would kill to have my life. I am absolutely committed to a free and open Internet.
Of course, the puritans are against this. The puritans are establishmentarians and authoritarians. You can never do anything because they're protecting you. Oh so very precious, the protection. No, enough with the shackles. The next generation has a right to grow without you cutting their legs out from under them.
Oh please, we're talking about children, not adults.
As I said I got on the internet at 25 and had a front row seat to the explosion of the web. Took to it like a duck to water. Considering all the time wasted, I didn't miss a thing waiting. It didn't harm me one bit.
You know what else I did in my twenties? Saw the world. Was much more compelling than online friends can ever be. Recommended.
You sound young, give it time and your perspective will change.
As I said I got on the internet at 25 and had a front row seat to the explosion of the web. Took to it like a duck to water. Considering all the time wasted, I didn't miss a thing waiting. It didn't harm me one bit.
You know what else I did in my twenties? Saw the world. Was much more compelling than online friends can ever be. Recommended.
You sound young, give it time and your perspective will change.
Are you trying to act sophisticated and condescending on the Internet? The added perspective of your travels should have taught you not to do that, surely.
Not after I listened to your diatribe about exposing children to filth and data tracking. Get outside was the point.
I ask because a lot of common arguments in this area don't seem to apply here that well. I'm not sure adults and adolescents on average have that much better of an understanding of how technology like this works in general (in terms of what is tracked and what your rights to that data are) - so mentioning that the kid didn't consent doesn't seem to change much, because adults using this technology don't understand what is being done behind the scenes either.