• ShinkanTrain@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    315
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

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

      • M137@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        50
        ·
        3 months ago

        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.

          • shneancy@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            9
            ·
            3 months ago

            if someone is like, half of the described vampire i don’t mind. Honestly it feels strange to have our ancient way of finding things out (asking your friends if they know) be somehow seen as wrong nowadays. I want to learn from other human being, not disembodied pieces of information oftentimes tied to ads for driver updating software

          • gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            3 months ago

            I encountered a user a week or two ago who was confused by the inaccurate output of an LLM, didn’t/couldn’t understand that it’s more or less just fancy autocomplete, who then tried to interact with the post replies as if the users were also an LLM. I had a great time calling that out. It was kinda hilarious, tbh.

        • anhydrous@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          3 months ago

          I work as a software engineer with other software engineers. Even software engineers and UX designers using the internet that way. Talented ones. Many of them - maybe the majority. It takes me a second to get over my astonishment when they share their screens. Not only astonishment at how overboard ads have gotten w/o an adblocker, but also that this particular person doesn’t use an adblocker.

          So many people aren’t well-informed about what ad networks or doing, or how different the web experience could be.

      • Lucidlethargy@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        24
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        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.

        • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 months ago

          Do you mean YouTube premium? Old YouTube music because they’re different things I think premium includes music actually but you can just have the music subscription.

          Youtube music is actually better than something like Spotify for creators, so it’s not the worst justification in the world.

      • MeatsOfRage@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        3 months ago

        It’s about to be a lot more with the chrome manifest update. I got my dad into chrome some 15 years ago and explaining why he should switch to Firefox is completely confusing for him. He thinks his own business listing on Google won’t work if he’s not using Chrome.

      • Blaster M@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        I’ve had people that refuse to use an adblocker because “the creators deserve to get paid”. Well, your funeral if you get malvertising…

  • cmnybo@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    125
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    3 months ago

    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@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      132
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      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.

      Edit: screenshot of the “Now Playing” feature

      1000009252

      • Pichu0102@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        39
        ·
        3 months ago

        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.

        • Im_Cool_I_Promise@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          14
          ·
          3 months ago

          It also uses a cloud fingerprint database apparently according to the second paragraph:

          If you turn on “Show search button on lock screen”, each time you tap to search Google receives a short, digital audio fingerprint to identify what’s playing.

          • Pichu0102@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            8
            ·
            3 months ago

            Oh, I didn’t notice this, my apologies. Turning on identify songs nearby reveals two new options, notifications and show search button. That show search button option must be new; I had identify nearby music on already since my last phone. Guess they added something new. My bad.

      • kratoz29@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        3 months ago

        I have seen said feature being mentioned or brought to other android versions whether with apps or modules, do they work the same way?

        • ChillPill@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          3 months ago

          I’m not sure how other apps or android versions work. This is a flaw with the closed source software ecosystem.

      • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        3 months ago

        The thing is I really can’t see Google allowing anyone else access. They don’t even allow Android OEMs to have access

      • grid11@lemy.nl
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        if this is used, or there is some whitelist that gives permission for background microphone use in voice interaction services, apps with tracking capabilities probably use some set of predefined keywords (hardcoded inside the app itself) and those can be triggered while being on standby/in background, when there is a match some pinging goes to outside servers…

        • ChillPill@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          37
          ·
          3 months ago

          What other apps use Google’s “Android Private Compute Core” and therefore don’t show mic or camera usage notifications? Not trying to sound all tinfoil hat here, but seriously: can apps other than those from Google use the “Android Private Compute Core”? Even if only Google’s own apps can use the “Android Private Compute Core”, we can’t see the source code for Google’s apps as (far as I know, anyway) they are not open source. If an app is not open source, we do not really know what the app is doing in the background; we’ll just have to take them at their word.

          • ChapulinColorado@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            10
            ·
            3 months ago

            Not to mention companies and their software (especially older versions) are commonly hacked. If there was a vulnerability, how long did my phone provide the hackers with unlimited access to those features to have them possibly try to extort me in real life.

      • db2@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        15
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        3 months ago

        Now if there was only an easy way to get to the offending app to identify it

    • Blackmist@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

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

      They’re bullshitting everyone including the people we hate.

    • CaptainSpaceman@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      3 months ago

      Supposedly more difficult.

      Android likes selling ads too, why would google want to stop ad blocking microphne access?

  • mox@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    110
    arrow-down
    20
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

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

    Meanwhile:

    • Billiam@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      175
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      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.

      • mox@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        29
        arrow-down
        60
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        if you record a video with sound, then the FB app has to have permission to record your audio.

        I can’t tell if you’re trying to explain how it currently works (which I know very well, thanks) or asserting that the current behavior is necessary in order to record with sound.

        It really doesn’t have to be as it is. The OS can provide a record-video API, complete with a user-controlled kill switch and an activity indicator, and the app can call it. The app doesn’t need direct access to the microphone to allow the user to create a file with sound.

        Edit to clarify: I’m not saying that the “permission” doesn’t work as advertised. I’m saying that recording an audio file doesn’t have to require a permission system as coarse and disempowering to users as it is today. I guess the people clicking the downvote button misunderstood.

        • conciselyverbose@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          42
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          3 months ago

          Pretty sure that qualifies for that permission.

          But the whole point of doing so is to use it in the app, and you for sure can’t do that without the permission.

          • Imgonnatrythis@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            20
            ·
            edit-2
            3 months ago

            I think this is more a teleological argument he is making and I agree. We’ve become numb to these permission warnings. Oh this app needs access to my camera because I need to take a photo of something once at registration. Why can’t it link to my default trusted photo app and that app can send a one time transfer to it? I hardly question these permissions anymore since many apps need permissions for rare one off functions. The only thing I deny every single time is my contact list.

          • mox@lemmy.sdf.org
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            17
            ·
            edit-2
            3 months ago

            Pretty sure that qualifies for that permission.

            I don’t know what you mean. Existing behavior does not provide the control or visibility that I described.

            One important difference is that the “permissions” in the screen shot are effectively all-or-nothing: if you don’t agree to all of them, then you don’t get to install the app. They’re not permissions so much as demands.

            (Some OS do have settings that will let you turn them off individually after installation, but this is not universally available, is often buried in an advanced configuration panel, leaves a window of time where they are still allowed, and in some cases have been known to cause apps to crash. Things are improving on this front with new OS versions, but doing so in microscopic steps that move at a glacial pace.)

            • conciselyverbose@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              20
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              3 months ago

              If your app touches the camera and mic, it will show up on that screen that it does so. “Using the API” (which is just how the OS works) doesn’t prevent it from appearing on that screen, especially when you’re doing so for the purpose of putting video and audio in posts.

              • mox@lemmy.sdf.org
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                7
                arrow-down
                9
                ·
                edit-2
                3 months ago

                If your app touches the camera and mic, it will show up on that screen that it does so.

                Showing up on that screen is no substitute for what is actually needed:

                • Individual control (an easy and obvious way to allow or deny each thing separately)
                • Minimal access (a way to create a sound file without giving Facebook access to an open mic)
                • Visibility (a clear indication by the OS when Facebook is capturing or has captured data)
                • Farid@startrek.website
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  8
                  ·
                  3 months ago

                  All of those things are implemented in modern Android. Well, almost.

                  • Whenever the app wants to use microphone an OS popup asks you if you want to give the app permission to use the feature. The options are “when using app”, “only this time” (it will give the app one-time-use access to the mic) and “never”. If you click the 1st or 3rd options, you wouldn’t see the popup again and you’ll have to change the permission from settings. If you choose the 2nd option, you can manually choose to give permission each time it’s requested.
                  • This is impossible? The OS can either let the app use the mic or not, it can’t tell what the app is doing with the mic. Unless you mean give a one-time permission this time, but not in the future, then we covered that in previous point.
                  • Android always shows a green indicator on screen (upper right corner) when any app is using the microphone or camera API. Well, almost always, some system apps might not trigger it. But if you want to see which app is using mic/camera you can tap the indicator.
      • ChapulinColorado@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        3 months ago

        Why wouldn’t you want to share your fitness data with the company that will sell it to the company setting your health “insurance” premiums? </s>

  • N0body@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    64
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    3 months ago

    “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.

    • edric@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      46
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      3 months ago

      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.

      • conciselyverbose@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        22
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        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.

      • N0body@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        The fundamental question is, “Do you trust Facebook?” They have the resources to manipulate the story and twist the truth. They have the capability to spy on you with mics, but they say they don’t do so. Do you trust them?

  • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    54
    ·
    3 months ago

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

  • Jezebelley@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    57
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    3 months ago

    “Yeah but the marketplace!” “Yeah but my friends use Messenger!”

    Normies don’t care about anything. They’ll keep using that piece of crap social app.

    • shneancy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      3 months ago

      call me a normie but I do like having contact with my family. And though I’d love to move somewhere where my privacy is respected - there’s no point in using a messaging app if you’re the only one there

      and no I can’t convince my 76 year old grandma to move to signal, she barely wrapped her head around Facebook

      • RaoulDook@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        3 months ago

        That’s a BS reason. I have 2 members of the Baby Boomer generation in my Signal contacts, they use it all the time with no problems. It’s no harder than iMessage to use. They would like it better when they see that Signal doesn’t gimp the image quality between Android and iOS phones unlike iMessage

        • shneancy@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          3 months ago

          Well i’m very happy for you and for them, but my 76 year old Polish grandmother - who got her first mobile phone at the age of 60ish, probably doesn’t even know what image quality is, definitely doesn’t know the difference between android and iOS, and has recently called me panicked to ask why all her photos were on Facebook, they weren’t, she was looking at her gallery preview through the Facebook app - is not going to be very enthusiastic about learning to use an app only her grandson uses.

          so I’ll just stick to messenger

        • TheChargedCreeper864@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          3 months ago

          It isn’t. I’ve personally had it happen where a relative who went to some country that bans video calling and VoIP (except for the unencrypted/honey pots of course) and used Signal to call people back home (only because I told them it would be unblocked due to censorship circumvention). Despite everyone in my household being familiar with WhatsApp, I was the only who did video calls with them and had to share my device so others could also call them. Even when I’d set up Signal on one of their devices, they still complained it was to difficult to use, insisted I’d uninstall it when the trip was over and used it a grand total of once.

          I honestly think it’s partly to do with the nerd factor. This same relative turned out to also have installed the backdoored unencrypted app to chat with others, but hid it from us due to me being vocal about not using that. These other households, also WhatsApp based, managed to install, sign up and use that just fine. They also couldn’t be bothered to set up Signal for some reason, yet gladly accepted the suggestion to use the honey pot.
          I think that these people in my circle don’t care about security at all and only care about the platform. If it’s “secure”, “private” and “censorship resistant” and they haven’t heard of it until I, the “techie”, explain the technological benefits of it, they’ll think it’s a niche “techie” thing they’re not nerdy enough to understand. If I get them to use it, they’ll keep thinking this whenever something is slightly different than WhatsApp and be frustrated. Meanwhile they can get behind the honey pot because “WhatsApp doesn’t work there, this is just what people in that country use”. It appears normal because “normal people” use it all the time, and they’ll solve any inconvenience themselves because “normal people (can) use this, and I’m normal too”.

    • Schadrach@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      3 months ago

      “Yeah but my friends use Messenger!”

      My mom uses Messenger. Acts like texting is too hard for her but Facebook Messenger isn’t. Literally the only reason I have it installed on my phone, because otherwise I don’t get the message when she needs something. If I could pry her away from it I could finally be done with the thing forever.

  • werefreeatlast@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    53
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    3 months ago

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

    • Capricorn_Geriatric@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      55
      ·
      3 months ago

      Wouldn’t want to be mean to Facebook users, but the vast majority of them probably has micophone access enabled for Messenger at least, if not Facebook.

    • PM_Your_Nudes_Please@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      21
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      At least on iOS, it takes it a step farther and tells you specifically when an app is accessing your location, microphone, camera, etc… It even delineates when it’s in the foreground or background. For instance, if I check my weather app, I get this symbol in the upper corner:

      The circled arrow means it is actively accessing my location. And if I close the app, it gives me this instead:

      The uncircled arrow means my location was accessed in the foreground recently. And if it happens entirely in the background, (like maybe Google has accessed my location to check travel time for an upcoming calendar event,) then the arrow will be an outline instead of being filled in.

      The same basic rules apply for camera and mic access. If it accesses my mic, I get an orange dot. If it accesses my camera, I get a green dot.

      • prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        My Pixel does the colored dot thing as well. It also has the ability to add “Mic access” and “camera access” quick options to the pull down menu to quickly turn the permissions on/off at the OS level. I keep mine off at all times. If I receive an incoming call, I get a popup asking if I want to enable the microphone to answer it.

      • OrekiWoof@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        3 months ago

        Yeah it’s great, same thing on the Google Pixel. The mic/camera thing brings peace of mind

      • whalebiologist@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        3 months ago

        I know you mean well, but you are making assumptions that the software is not lying to you. You can’t trust a UI element.

      • 𝒍𝒆𝒎𝒂𝒏𝒏@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        For anyone who doesn’t have a device that natively supports this feature, there’s an app on F-Droid called “Privacy Indicators” that provides this for camera and mic access. It uses the built-in Accessibility services to provide this, and needs a couple of other special permissions

        You can change the color of the indicator, mine’s red for more visibility.

        I installed it from GitHub however, since the F-Droid build was really outdated: https://github.com/NitishGadangi/Privacy-Indicator-App

    • Clbull@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      3 months ago

      Facebook listening in on your microphone is one of those things that I actually believe to be true. Ever had conversations with people to then realize that you’re being served targeted ads based on these conversations? Seems very coincidental.

      • Phoenixz@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        13
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        3 months ago

        Nope

        There are other ways they do that, like thrird party cookies, and combining data from many, many sources.

        Apps simply CAN’T access those kinds of things unless you allow it. You can check this in the apps permissions on your phone if you’re not sure. If microphone access is allowed, then yeah, they’ll be listening, probably. But remove that permission and you’ll be fine

    • chakan2@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      3 months ago

      Ever use voice in messenger? If so FB has the permissions it needs to open your mic.

    • Agent641@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      The future is going to be amazing! Well, it has the potential to be amazing if we use tech the right way. No I mean, like in an ethical way. Without exploiting people. No not like that, in a way that helps people. Well yes, billionaires are people, but I meant… at least it should be in legal ways. Or at least policed. Not hostile to average people. Not an openly criminal endeavour. Maybe just dont criminalise resistance to it? … oh, actually the future is going to be a techno-monopolistic dark age, I see. We can pivot to covering that.

    • Valmond@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      3 months ago

      Yeah that’s a shame, electronics seems to have reached a level where most people just don’t need or dream of a better something (PC, phone, etc) and other tech is hard to grasp like biotech.

    • AJ1@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      3 months ago

      yeah like tell me something I don’t know.

      “This just in: to the surprise of no one, your phone has, in fact, been spying on you from day 1. Now we go to Jim with sports. Jim?”

      • Mr_Blott@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        3 months ago

        tell me something I don’t know

        My grandad said “It’s really humid today isn’t it?”

        I said “Tell me something I don’t know!”

        He said “Err… Ok… I can fit my whole fist up yer gran’s arse”

      • Chocrates@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        This is such a strange reality to live in. All of the futuristic, dystopian fiction I have consumed has the same premise that people living in the dystopia know it and know it’s bad. Somehow reality is worse.

    • Blackdoomax@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      36
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      3 months ago

      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 ’

      • endofline@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        13
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        Yeah, being not paranoid is hard in XXI century.

        TBH the same scenario has been mentioned in the “ex machina” movie from 2014 when colleb has been asking how the humanoid robots work. The deep blue was AI of search engine taking data from listening to the phone calls

      • JovialMicrobial@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        I feel like we’ve been gaslighted so bad about this that we were even denying each other’s reality.

        I knew they had to be doing this so I turned off all mic permissions. One day it pissed me off so much I started keeping my phone off completely unless I needed to use it.

        The only good thing that came out of it was I learned about ad blockers. Fine, listen to me since I can’t fucking stop you(keeping phone off was inconvenient), but it’s futile now and you wasted money since I won’t see your stupid fucking ads anymore.

        • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          3 months ago

          I knew they had to be doing this so I turned off all mic permissions. One day it pissed me off so much I started keeping my phone off completely unless I needed to use it

          It might be an easy to just stop using Facebook really.

          I’ve had enough time to work out which of my relatives are racist, so I don’t really need it anymore.

          • JovialMicrobial@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            3 months ago

            I don’t have fb or the youtube app and haven’t for years… so I’m not sure what was doing it. I have ublock origin now, so if it’s still happening I wouldn’t know.

            Honestly the thought of them pouring that much money into r&d and launching that spyware just to have us plebs block the end result(ads) does feel kinda good at least.

    • dev_null@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      3 months ago

      It’s the reverse. Non tech people believe the snake oil, tech people know this is snake oil.

  • Snapz@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    39
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    3 months ago

    What’s the last “bombshell scandal that would ruin a company” that actually ruined a company?

      • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        3 months ago

        Cambridge Analytica, but only because what they were doing was so monumentally illegal. I’m sure the government would have let them get away with it if they could have thought of a way out for them. A lot of them mates were involved in that scandal.

      • zbyte64@awful.systems
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        3 months ago

        As a business you can be a maverick against many laws, just not the laws regarding finance.

    • SulaymanF@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      3 months ago

      Unroll.me was a service that would scan your email and clean up your inbox. The New York Times reported that the company was gathering sales receipts emails, anonymizing them, and selling them to rival companies; for example Uber paid them to hand over all the sales receipts they could on Lyft rides in people’s mailboxes. The bad press made them eventually sell the company to Slice, mainly for the email archives they amassed.

  • Suavevillain@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    33
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    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@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    40
    arrow-down
    11
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    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.

      • Duamerthrax@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        19
        arrow-down
        9
        ·
        3 months ago

        And there have been push back against the idea by naive, trusting people who think the toggles for that do anything. The fact that there’s leak conversations now of advertisers admitting they do it will sink any counter argument against it.

        Also, if advertisers are doing it, you can bet that the government can too.

        • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          12
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          3 months ago

          No that’s being pushed back on the idea from people with tech skills who work in the cyber security industries. You don’t think they would realize if something like this was happening and shout it from the rooftops?

          It’s everyone’s favorite past time to dunk on Facebook but that doesn’t mean we should make stuff up without evidence. Calling people naive because they don’t believe you is the same as saying it’s true because you want it to be.

          Evidence must be presented. I’ve never seen any not in the 10 years these claims have been made. No one has ever bothered to provide a shred of evidence and all of it is who I talked about X and then I saw an ad for X.

          Pardon me for wanting something a little bit more concrete

          • prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            3 months ago

            Sure thing… Just install Facebook Messenger on your phone and don’t pay attention to all of the permissions it needs that are completely unrelated to communicating with people in a messaging app. It is literal malware.

          • Duamerthrax@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            5
            ·
            3 months ago

            You don’t think they would realize if something like this was happening and shout it from the rooftops?

            Nope. Too many people are just trying to collect a paycheck. This is testable without access to the backend or source code and too many sociopaths work in the industry. My default is to distrust anything when the other party has a profit motive to lie. It’s anti-skeptical, but you have to prove that they aren’t spying on me if you want me to trust something.

            • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              5
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              3 months ago

              Okay so address my fundamental point which is show me the evidence because otherwise you’re living in exciting reality of your own creation. I am positive it is very fun in there, but it doesn’t have much to do with here on Earth

              Come leave here on the other side of the reality curtain we have donuts.

          • Duamerthrax@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            5
            ·
            3 months ago

            This is not the court of law and no one is going to jail because of my distrust of corporations. “Innocent until proven guilty” does not apply here. Any batshit idea I could come with on how a corporation could siphon my data, they have already thought of and tried. They do not deserve the benefit of the doubt.

        • steeznson@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          3 months ago

          I used to work in adtech and the most we could do was track locations. Even that didn’t work properly for our purposes because most shops are in malls where several different stores co-exist on the same coordinates. It only worked for outlets in retail parks which were separated from one another.

        • prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          3 months ago

          It’s wild how much trust people are willing to put into capitalist corporations again and again as if they give a single shit about them.

          • Duamerthrax@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            3 months ago

            People are lazy and life is easier when you just blindly trust things you don’t understand. People think I’m weird that I don’t want a Ring camera INSIDE my house. I wouldn’t even put on outside my home.

            • grandkaiser@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              6
              ·
              edit-2
              3 months ago

              The reverse is just as true:

              “People are lazy and life is easier when you just blindly hate things you don’t understand.”

              As a network engineer, it’s frustrating to see laymen make outlandish claims about technology with their source being “corpo bad”. I hate corporations too, but it would be an absolute bombshell if it were true. There’s just no possible way that every single hacker and security engineer are in league with the corporations.

              • Duamerthrax@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                3 months ago

                Honestly, with how people reacted to covid numbers being fudged downward or accepting whatever lie that claims that climate change is fake, I do not believe that any more evidence that corporations are listening in on your conversations would get any reaction out of the population. Hell, did anything come from the Panama Papers or Paradise Papers? The average person does not care.

                • grandkaiser@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  3 months ago

                  Sure, people might not care, but that doesn’t change the facts. Experts aren’t denying the legitimacy of the Panama or Paradise Papers, but they are saying that the idea of megacorporations secretly listening to your microphone and selling you products based on that is false. If they were doing that, it would be pretty easy to find out. Smartphones aren’t some mysterious black box; security engineers and hackers are constantly checking for these kinds of exploits. If corporations were actually spying on us through our phones, it would be the biggest topic at DEFCON. Believing that this could be kept secret would require assuming that all these experts are either paid off or in cahoots with the corporations, which veers into full-blown conspiracy theory territory.

    • grrgyle@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      I even got an email out of nowhere right in my inbox from Dell the same day I was talking about Dell laptops with my book club. I would be so shocked if these examples are mere coincidence

      Having worked on the tech side of email marketing campaigns I would actually be impressed

      • Warl0k3@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        Setting aside confirmation bias (idk, because it’s boring?): So people you’re in a book club with, an established group which it is very easy to associate you with, were discussing Dell laptops… and you think it’s strange you got looped in? If three people from your book club all looked up dells later, or earlier, or etc. etc., why wouldn’t they figure you might also be interested in dell laptops? An approach that doesn’t require NLP of god only knows how much hypothetical audio taken from pockets, and works much better?

        • grrgyle@slrpnk.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 months ago

          I’m just shocked that there are marketing departments that actually know what they’re doing. Granted I haven’t worked for any huge companies, so that’s probably why I have difficulty picturing it.

  • gcheliotis@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    26
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    3 months ago

    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.

    • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      They have it’s very easy there are free programs that monitor all data traffic.

      This claim that Facebook listens to you on your phone has been around for years. It has been investigated numerous times and has never turned out to be true. Until recently the processing capacity required would have been insane and you would have an incredibly high noise to signal ratio. It’s just not an economical way of gathering data for advertising.

      Why bother anyway when people put their entire lives on Facebook, for free, in easily processable text?

      • homicidalrobot@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        3 months ago

        Your phone/plan carrier using voice data to make a marketing profile is well documented actually. This data is purchased and verified and resold by meta, or in some cases bought and used by alphabet for GAS. Cacti can show you outgoing data for every device on a network, and you can see data being sent from a phone in signed packets going to your carrier when you’re not “actively using” it. It seems like you know about network monitoring tools but you haven’t actually used them, just talked about them in reference to data collection.

        “Why buy the cow” here is also easily answered: not everyone uses Facebook, a fair number of users will deactivate their facebook page but continue to use messenger.

            • dev_null@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              3 months ago

              Yeah, with lots of leaked customer data. Nothing about using voice data to make a marketing profile. Unless there is a second leak I don’t know about.

              But judging by your inability to link it you just made it up.

        • Xatolos@reddthat.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          7
          ·
          3 months ago

          So what you’re saying is the biggest companies like Amazon, Google, ChatGPT, etc… can’t perfect voice dictation when I’m talking directly and clearly to my device, but this company has been able to figure it out. And doing it while hiding from the smartphone OS that it’s doing it. While the device is at a distance/hidden in my pocket. And is using it just to sell ads.

          👍

              • homicidalrobot@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                3 months ago

                I asked because it was nonsensical and could have been funny if you were imitating the typical internet child comment but here we are with you making no sense and me disappointed

      • prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        Because people’s (presumed private) conversations on Messenger are not the same thing as things people post publicly.

        Personally, I would never install that malware on my phone. But if you even have FB Messenger installed on your device, chances are that it’s constantly sending your data to Facebook. Go take a look at what permissions it “needs.”

        • Warl0k3@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          3 months ago

          We can see what it’s sending to facebook though, and it’s not constant. There’s a bunch that it does send and receive, but this isn’t hypothetical speculation, like, we can just see that it’s not using your microphone for that, or sending anything like audio data. You can check this yourself, wireshark is free and packet specifications are available.

          • prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            3 months ago

            I get that, but it just happens far too often to be coincidence.

            I’m not going to claim to know how, but it’s naive to take the word of corporations when we have so much circumstantial evidence that shows these firms are targeting people with ads for things that they had never shown interest in, but happened to mention once in the presence of a device with a microphone and internet connection. There have been people who have tested this, and have gotten results that indicate that this just cannot be a coincidence. It has happened to me personally on several occasions (before I started keeping my mic off at the OS level, hasn’t happened since).

            I’ve been around long enough to know that, just because the general public doesn’t know how some proprietary tech that corporations spend billions on R&D for might work, doesn’t mean it’s impossible. People have come up with insane shit, and that’s just the stuff that people have voluntarily (usually) disclosed. God knows what kind of proprietary shit is out there that we have no awareness of.

            I mean, for fuck sake, you can now steal a person’s password by listening to their keystrokes:

            https://www.tomsguide.com/news/the-sound-your-keystrokes-make-is-enough-for-ai-to-steal-them-how-to-stay-safe

            Not to mention the fact that the NSA likely has back doors in every major piece of software and hardware in the US…

            I know that stuff isn’t directly related, but the point is that these things always seem impossible, until it gets leaked that it’s been possible for years now.

      • dev_null@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        By paying people $20 / month in exchange for installing a VPN that will snoop on your data so they can market research their competitors.

        It is unacceptable, but it wasn’t in secret from the users. They agreed to get paid in exchange for the usage data of competitor apps.

        So it’s a completely different situation to any “secretly spying” claim. The users had to go out of their way to get it setup.

        • InternetPerson@lemmings.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          6
          ·
          3 months ago

          Yes. Just another malicious thing facebook does. Surely, they are totally trustworthy in all other regards. /s

            • InternetPerson@lemmings.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              4
              ·
              3 months ago

              The evidence is: among other things, facebook has repeatedly violated user’s privacy. It would be no surprise if they would also monitor conversations via the microphone. Sure, currently there seems to be no evidence for that. But I wouldn’t be so naive to just trust them on that.

                • InternetPerson@lemmings.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  3 months ago

                  This is not evidence that they’re using your microphone, and you know it’s not.

                  I didn’t claim it to be evidence for that.

                  somehow bypassing Google and Apple’s mic usage notifications

                  Unless some form of hardware notification is hardwired into the device, which indicates cam or mic usage, I’m on the rather paranoid side regarding software notifications. Software is usually much easier to break. I’m leaning a lot out of the window now, as I don’t know how secure those notifications are implemented. However, even then there is reason for concern, given that facebook had / has questionable deals with device manufacturers. If they were willing to share personal data with device manufacturers, there is reason to suspect this went or can go the other way around as well.

                  I don’t know why you keep coming back to trust. […] That’s not the point.

                  It is mine. Even though there is no evidence for a surveillance using device microphones itself yet and it could be surprising if they were able to, given the history of facebook, they participated in a lot of rather surprising shit.

    • Blackmist@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      Anybody that’s ever spoken to a salesperson knows that they’re talking out of their arse most of the time, and I doubt this is an exception.

      He’s said this because he thinks that the people he’s talking to will give him more money if he does.

      If it was happening at all you’d have seen proof by now. Like people pulling apps apart and finding proof, not just “I spoke to Bob last week about cameras and now I’m seeing ads for cameras”.

      The truly terrifying part is they don’t need to listen to your conversations to know what you want.