• @el_abuelo@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          English
          16 months ago

          That’s ludicrous. “An average person” cares about more than “nothing” - such statements saying otherwise are just what the 0.1% want.

          Stop fighting each other and start fighting the people who have created and persisted this dumpster fire.

    • @shneancy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      56 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
        -26 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

        • @TheChargedCreeper864@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          26 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”.

        • @shneancy@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          2
          edit-2
          6 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

    • Schadrach
      link
      fedilink
      English
      26 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.

  • Tygr
    link
    fedilink
    English
    86 months ago

    Turn off microphone access to all social media and tell your friends the same. I’ve disabled mine for years and all ads are generic or from prior sites visited.

    • @bluewing@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      86 months ago

      Do you one better - My mini-desktop is plugged into a monitor with no microphone or camera.

  • @menas@lemmy.wtf
    link
    fedilink
    English
    66 months ago

    What ? A corporation that earn money in selling personal data, that don’t want to share its code that run on a device with a microphone, actually use it ? I’m shocked

  • Flying Squid
    link
    fedilink
    English
    546 months ago

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

  • dianyxx
    link
    fedilink
    36 months ago

    Wonder what it’ll get out of ‘Kill Zuckerberg’ and other things.

  • @ZILtoid1991@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    116 months ago

    goes close to a smartphone “BLOODY MARY! BLOODY MARY! BLOODY MARY!” gets advertisements from local pubs and restaurants serving Bloody Mary at a discount

    • Echo Dot
      link
      fedilink
      English
      26 months ago

      I had a bloody mary last weekend, you’re clearly listening in on my conversations.

  • @Suavevillain@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    336 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.

  • I Cast Fist
    link
    fedilink
    English
    406 months ago

    I remember reading some time ago that “the idea (of phones listening to everything you say to serve ads) makes no economic sense, because it’d be too expensive to run”

    Looks like it actually isn’t “too expensive” to run in the end.

    • @TheObviousSolution@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      10
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      It’s not when it’s your device doing the computing. All electronic devices should have visible hardware indicators for when their camara or microphone is on, but that’s a consumer rights issue most people are dismissive of, so it’s not happening. Some people even always want it on for the assistant functionality.

        • Echo Dot
          link
          fedilink
          English
          6
          edit-2
          6 months ago

          Not how it works.

          They have an ultra low power processor that listens for the “hey Google” keyword, then that wakes up the main audio processor. But the main microphone is not actually on, and that small processor isn’t capable of recording audio it’s just looking for a certain matching sound wave and then triggering.

          That’s why it sometimes triggers if you just go “hurr ner dorrll” because those random sounds are close enough to what it’s looking for.

          That is why some older devices can’t actually install the assistant software. They lack the necessary hardware to do it in a power efficient manner.

    • Schadrach
      link
      fedilink
      English
      86 months ago

      Even then, you have local voice recognition. You don’t need to stream all microphone recordings to some central server for processing, you just do voice recognition and keep a log of say the last 100 nouns and a high priority log for the last twenty nouns used near verbs like purchase, buy or get. Then send those lists to the ad provider as context. All the hard work is done on the client device and the same backend used for ad context on web pages can be used for this as well.

      • mrinfinity
        link
        fedilink
        English
        56 months ago

        Then hide it encrypted in an image upload or some other packet. Listen for ‘buy a <something>’ encrypt its text version, wait for something to cargo it with in a data transmission so people looking at data transmissions aren’t any the wiser, hide it in some obscure way that would look normal otherwise, it’s intercepted, sends off to advertisers. Adtech is cyber terrorism.

        • Echo Dot
          link
          fedilink
          English
          46 months ago

          You don’t think security experts know about stereonography techniques? It’s like the first thing you learn about in uni for it. Like the first week.

    • Maeve
      link
      fedilink
      96 months ago

      Yep, and it’s not just Facebook, not just microphone. My lappie recently started serving ads for something I searched on a device not linked to it. I’m guessing it’s my ISP engaging in these sneak tactics.

    • @dev_null@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      26 months ago

      Yeah, a marketing agency selling snake oil to people that actually think they can do it is not expensive. Of course they never actually built the tech.

    • @Overshoot2648@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      126 months ago

      Except Facebook never used it this was a 3rd party trying to hype up investors. Many audits have been run on these apps and there is no way they use your microphone. It’s way cheaper to just look at your search history.

    • @Capricorn_Geriatric@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      566 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.

      • @Zink@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        216 months ago

        This comment inspired me to go turn off microphone, camera, Bluetooth, and local network access for every app. I’ll reenable as necessary.

        • @Texas_Hangover@lemy.lol
          link
          fedilink
          English
          136 months ago

          Just leave it on for whatever runs your phone calls. I emabarrasingly discovered that the phone app NEEDS microphone access lol.

          • @prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone
            link
            fedilink
            English
            9
            edit-2
            6 months ago

            I keep my microphone and camera off at the OS level always now. Android has quick options for it that you can add to your pull-down menu thing at the top. When I get an incoming call, a popup comes up asking if I want to allow voice permissions. Then after the call I disable it again. Same goes if I need to take photos.

            I’ve never not believed that they listen to this shit. I’ve had far too many coincidental ad placements after saying something completely unrelated to anything I’ve ever searched for.

    • @PM_Your_Nudes_Please@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      21
      edit-2
      6 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
        5
        edit-2
        6 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.

      • @whalebiologist@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        36 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
        link
        fedilink
        English
        2
        edit-2
        6 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

      • @OrekiWoof@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        46 months ago

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

    • @Clbull@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      66 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
        link
        fedilink
        English
        116 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

  • foremanguy
    link
    fedilink
    English
    16 months ago

    Until now it was really annoying to collect audio and then use it. The app needs to constantly record, send out the datas and then lastly process it to be useful. Today the cost versus benefits are really not to their advantage.

    But tomorrow this might change, if they find a way of using the mic to serve ads be sure that they will. The only question today is how? The only option at this time is for me to process the stuff offline. As they do today with “ok google”. Within the next months-years we are going to see more and more phones and it stuff using dedicated or specialized AI chip, they will be great with really low consumption to run 24/24. They could analyse offline the speech, make a resume and lastly when the connectivity is sufficient and enough datas are collwcted, the phone sends out all the infos to the companies servers.

    I’ve seen some comments about the fact that others companies that Google cannot really use the mic in this way, this is right…today. But in the future make sure that when they will have developed correctly this concept, Google (and Apple) would surely be okay with this approach (maybe in exchange with some bucks).

    Today phones are surely not listening to us, but they know so much things that we are actually thinking that they are. But this way is maybe not enough profitable for them, so they want to invade even more our privacy to gain more of this fucking thing called “money”.

  • @oweka@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    76 months ago

    For everyone saying apps need permission to use your mic I want to point you to “play services”. The permissions protections only apply to user space apps not system apps. Thats how u can say “OK google” and get the chat ai to pop up even tho its “not listening” according to the OS.

    Also if you read the website they are not piping audio to their servers. They push triggers (keywords, etc) to the local ai on your phone that listens for things like “OK google” and then sends those reports back.

    Meta apps would need permission to to mic but I think if y’all check your big tech apps u will be surprised how many have that permission.

    I can’t speak to iOS because its closed source but it probably has similar backdoors for apple.

  • @Redruth@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    English
    76 months ago

    easy to test. men can say “tampons glitter lotion” several times a day. women say “garage exhaust cable”.

  • @N0body@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    596 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
      link
      fedilink
      English
      446 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
        216 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
        66 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?