A media firm that has worked with the likes of Google and Meta has admitted that it can target adverts based on what you said out loud near device microphones.
Media conglomerate Cox Media Group (CMG) has been pitching tech companies on a new targeted advertising tool that uses audio recordings collected from smart home devices, according to a 404 Media investigation. The company is partners with Facebook, Google, Amazon, and Bing.
In a pitch deck presented to Google, Facebook, and others in November 2023, CMG referred to the technology used for monitoring and active listening as “Voice Data.” The firm also mentioned using artificial intelligence to collect data about consumers’ online behavior.
they’ve claimed the same last year in December, and it turned out they were overselling their capabilities
Some people really will believe anything, as long as you’re trash talking big tech. And this platform is particularly bad.
Like hell are they able to just tap into your microphone like that, both Android and I OS have that locked down.
Some people really will believe anything, as long as you’re trash talking big tech. And this platform is particularly bad.
Just say something like you should be paying for YouTube (via ads or premium) and brace for the swarm.
Been there, done that. They start yelling about Plex servers and torrents.
I don’t want to turn downloading shows into a hobby in it’s own right.
I’d pay if they actually offered a better service. But they don’t, so I use alternatives that do:
- Grayjay - sub to more than just YouTube, downloading works as expected, etc
- Nebula - smaller selection of content, but downloading works as expected
Both of those offer a better experience than YouTube premium (in terms of app features). If YouTube offered a higher quality experience, I’d be more interested in paying for it.
So, I instead just donate to/buy merch from creators I really appreciate and avoid the YouTube app. The only reason Google is involved is because of the network effect, not because they actually provide a good service, so I don’t feel bad cheating them out of their ad revenue.
I bailed on Netflix and Disney+, but I refuse to torrent, so I rip DVDs and Blurays to my Jellyfin instance.
You should read the 404 piece, it’s considerably less sensational and doesn’t flat lie in the headline. I hate Big Tech too, but this is very bad framing.
Can you pass a link?
it’s the link above: https://www.404media.co/heres-the-pitch-deck-for-active-listening-ad-targeting/
A bundle of people say they have a paywall but they don’t, they have an AI-bot-wall which can be got around with a free account. I’d recommend it tbh because they are doing very good work.
I pay the yearly subscription to support them as they are very much a rare entity in tech media: independent, reader-supported, and willing to ask difficult questions of tech companies, not fawn over their newest doodads.
Critically, “Meta, Amazon, and Microsoft told 404 Media they have no involvement with CMG’s Voice Data tool.”
But more importantly, they can’t listen on your microphone unless you give them permission. It’s not a thing that is technically possible. And like the article says, these days phones even show an indicator to alert you when the microphone is on.
That indicator and the permission system are provided by the OS on your phone. If you trust your OEM not to abuse it, then it works. If the company that made your device is facebook, neither of those features prevent facebook from listening in 24/7.
Yeah, no need for voice data, they just use search patterns. It’s easy to feel like they’re listening to you and serving you an ad for something you said or talked about, but most likely it’s just something the user searched for.
Search patterns yes, but also location data, and it’s aggregated over all your friends. So if you go to a restaurant together with a friend who recently searched for some clothes brand, the algorithm will know that and show you ads for that brand. Chances are you talked about his interests when you met, so you incorrectly infer that it was listening to the conversation.
It baffles me that people actually take these assertions seriously, especially after having used different software that uses voice input, like Siri, Google Assistant, Alexa or whatever. Those things make some serious mistakes even under ideal circumstances, and you want me to believe that they can accurately overhear things in non-ideal circumstances? I highly doubt it.
Regardless, you can use an ad blocker to make this a moot point - I’ve never experienced anything even close to this, because I never get ads.
No bro one time I was talking about buying protein shakes with my bro and then THE VERY NEXT DAY I saw an ad for protein shakes after watching Joe Rogan on the weightlifting subreddit.
You expect me to believe this is coincidence?!?!?!?!?!
This is a false anecdote and outdated too.
When it comes to Android, this should be standard. You can block all the bullshit with a few clicks, some apps don’t need internet access at all (such as the fucking keyboard, Google).
Obligatory FUTO keyboard recommendation. I liked Swiftkey - but not enough to defend the idea of an online keyboard.
The only problem I have with it is that it doesn’t have support for 12-key Japanese input.
The only problem I have with it is that it doesn’t have support for 12-key Japanese input.
Tried it now, it’s really great but doesn’t have the full pc layout that includes our accursed Č,Ć,Š.Đ diacritics. I’m actually really satisfied with my jugaad solution - downgraded version of gboard, frozen in time and cut off from the internet by Rethink VPN. There’s no reason to update it, really, which is lucky since newer versions start randomly lagging if they can’t reach google’s fucking servers.
My trust in Google and Facebook after this: 📉📉📉
Confirming what we already know. After the 100th time you get a recommendation for a product you mentioned in a conversation the day before you start to get a little suspicious.
Yeah, when I read this I was like ‘is anyone still denying ads use of microphone?’ Eight years ago I would be called paranoid, but now everybody experienced smartphone at it’s best.
Read this post. Disable microphone access on the phone.
”In most moments of the day, there’s a smart device in within two-inch radius of us. That means a smart device is likely within earshot when we talk about our plans for the weekend, how badly we need our kitchen remodeled, or which SUV model is best for the family with our spouse, and so much more,” the company wrote.
Facebook and Google swear they cast it into the fire, because they don’t want to take away your privacy to make money. Do you believe them?
We know, you don’t need to admit it 10 years after the fact.
A lot of seemingly smart people said that it would not make sense to do that.
Yes they do. Not enough people know.
We need everyone to talk about this until it becomes general public knowledge, and then general public outrage.
Have you read the article? They’re claiming (!) that they would use ads on websites to use mic data. If you know anything about Android or IOS, you’ll know that you have to give mic permission to your browser for it to have access to anything. THEN the browser itself checks if a website needs access to your mic and you have to willingly give it. And lastly: Android indicates when your mic is hot with a green dot. So all of their claims are bs.
Come back if one of the OS developers admit to always listen on an OS level.
Come back if one of the OS developers admit to always listen on an OS level.
If the device does not listen at all times it cannot detect the wake word (Hey Google).
Edit: formatting.
If a device isn’t using a local detection of the wake word it would have a constant stream of data sent back to the developer… Which is super obvious.
It also wouldn’t be able to respond “Your device is offline” when the Internet is down.
It’s not a thing and it doesn’t happen.
Well look, not to be dismissive of what you’re saying, but the technical aspects of it really don’t matter. There is not (yet) any law in the US that would protect people from such surveillance, regardless of its current technical infeasibility. The point of getting people at large worried or upset about this is to get law established before it becomes a widespread problem, not after some company publicly admits to doing something despicable.
The fact that companies are thinking about this, trying to accomplish it, trying to buy this functionality from other companies… that should be enough to scare people and get them angry. It’s certainly enough that we should all be talking about it, and publicly shaming them for the voyeuristic creeps that they are.
There should be riots in the streets over stuff like this, because you can’t build a surveillance state without surveillance technology.
I agree with the premise but I have zero confidence this would cause outrage. Most people are too stupid to understand the implications
