Slashdot Mirror


Facebook Delays Home-Speaker Unveil Amid Data Crisis (bloomberg.com)

Bloomberg reports: Facebook has decided not to unveil new home products at its major developer conference in May, in part because the public is currently so outraged about the social network's data-privacy practices, according to people familiar with the matter. The company's new hardware products, connected speakers with digital-assistant and video-chat capabilities, are undergoing a deeper review to ensure that they make the right trade-offs regarding user data, the people said.

While the hardware wasn't expected to be available until the fall, the company had hoped to preview the devices at the largest annual gathering of Facebook developers, said the people, who asked not to be named discussing internal plans. The devices are part of Facebook's plan to become more intimately involved with users' everyday social lives, using artificial intelligence -- following a path forged by Amazon.com and its Echo in-home smart speakers. As concerns escalate about Facebook's collection and use of personal data, now may be the wrong time to ask consumers to trust it with even more information by placing a connected device in their homes.

19 of 84 comments (clear)

  1. Good God- please can this! by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 2

    After the failed Facebook-Phone I can't imagine Facebook-Alexa would be anymore successful. I can't see anyone wanting facebook having a microphone in their home. If they were willing to have an ear they would have an Alexa or a Google Home by now.

    --
    "That's the way to do it" - Punch
    1. Re:Good God- please can this! by gnick · · Score: 2

      I can't see anyone wanting facebook having a microphone in their home.

      I still can't believe anyone would tolerate a Google mic in their home, but here we are. Agreed that most people who want one of these will have gone with Google or Amazon, but FB does have some zealots so nothing will surprise me.

      --
      He's getting rather old, but he's a good mouse.
    2. Re:Good God- please can this! by Luthair · · Score: 2

      Google? Why any company?

    3. Re:Good God- please can this! by gnick · · Score: 3, Funny

      I just picked Google because it seems like the worse actor between them and Amazon. I don't want any company having a mic in my house, but I'm not going to judge people who decide they value the convenience these devices add over their aversion to an open mic. Why any company? Because these devices provide value for some users and not everyone sees targeted advertising as an invasion of their privacy. If the mic doesn't bother somebody and they really want to be able to say, "Alexa play light jazz," that's not my decision to make for them.

      Between Facebook, Google, and Amazon, I really don't trust any of them to be responsible with my data. Why can't Microsoft make one of these? Reliable, trustworthy Microsoft.

      --
      He's getting rather old, but he's a good mouse.
    4. Re:Good God- please can this! by gnick · · Score: 2

      I think the key here is that users have to be able to make informed consent.

      I agree. But, if it's more profitable to be shady, and if you have a big enough customer base that either doesn't care or doesn't know any better, shady practices may prevail.

      Personally, I'd like to know more about what these companies are collecting on me as-is and I'll be damned before I'll buy one of these assistants.

      --
      He's getting rather old, but he's a good mouse.
    5. Re:Good God- please can this! by ctilsie242 · · Score: 3

      I can't believe anyone wants this type of appliance in their place. First, if you want decent sound, you need two speakers, and none of these support that. Apple will in a future update, but not right now. Second, do I need another privacy violating device? Not really. My desktop machine doesn't have a mic or camera on it unless I plug in a headset, and that is fine with me.

      What does this device give someone? If I want Siri or whatnot, my phone can handle that. If I want music, I have good Yamaha monitors that can be cranked, and give a far more accurate reproduction of sound than what Bluetooth can do. There isn't anything that this device gives that is worth having the extreme invasions of privacy that go with them. Plus, they are not cheap. For the price of one, I can get a decent set of decent speakers.

    6. Re:Good God- please can this! by Green+Mountain+Bot · · Score: 3, Interesting

      My wife's grandmother can' see a damned thing. For her, to be to ask a question and get an audible response is a real improvement to her quality of life.

      But I wouldn't want that shit in MY house.

    7. Re:Good God- please can this! by tripleevenfall · · Score: 2

      But the recent revelations about Facebook show that they will collect things that they know you don't want them collecting, and bury the consent somewhere in a general eula.

      I don't want corporate microphones around my house from ANY company - LEAST of all Facebook

  2. Put Facebook in the home? by GregMmm · · Score: 2

    Who on earth would want to have a Facebook enabled "anything" in their home?

    1. Re:Put Facebook in the home? by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Who on Earth would want Facebook anything?

      FTFY

      --
      #DeleteFacebook
  3. Dystopian outcomes. by Gravis+Zero · · Score: 2

    All the tech companies that have one of these hot mics have a business model that can support it... except Facebook. I suspect that Facebook would be the company that would result in the dystopian outcome that we all fear could come about from these "home speakers" because their business model is simply to gather information and sell it.

    --
    Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
  4. Re:And what, pray tell? by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 3, Interesting

    That would be a great poll idea, wouldn't it?

    Which smart speaker would you trust the most?
    Apple HomePod
    Amazon Echo
    Google Home
    Facebook what's-its-name

    --
    #DeleteFacebook
  5. Does not compute by arth1 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    to ensure that they make the right trade-offs regarding user data

    There are things you just shouldn't have any authority to decide on trade-offs for, and especially trade-offs on the behalf of others.

    I think this highlights why the US needs data protection regulations like the EU and other European countries have, where personal data is owned by the user, and not the company that collects it, and where companies who create databases of user data beyond what's needed for a transaction have to provide a justification and obtain a permit.
    Giving them a carte blanche and letting them decide for themselves what "trade-offs" they want to play is stupid.

  6. Re:And what, pray tell? by arth1 · · Score: 3, Funny

    That would be a great poll idea, wouldn't it?

    You're missing the last option.
    In this case, I'd actually trust Cowboyneal listening in my living room more than any of the above.

  7. Re:Yeah, no .... by gnick · · Score: 3, Funny

    ...Alexa powered fleshlight...

    I'd go with Alexa, but I'd be thinking of Siri.

    --
    He's getting rather old, but he's a good mouse.
  8. Trust is hard to gain and easy to lose by Opportunist · · Score: 2

    Let's face it: Anyone trusting them on ANYTHING anymore cannot be helped. If you still can't understand how you're nothing but a commodity to that company, well, there's no amount of evidence, argument or convincing going to be of any use.

    And if you really believe them when they say that they will "improve", there isn't anything left to be said either. Their whole business model is to sell your privacy to whoever is willing to hand them money. That is their business model. In case you don't believe it, just tell me what else this company could possible sell to make money.

    And if that doesn't work for you, how about greed and miserliness. Ponder how much Facebook is "worth". Ponder what you got for being sold by them. Now tell me you don't feel like you've been getting a raw deal. They sell you for thousands of dollars and you get ... umm... a place to put pictures of your lunch.

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  9. Re:They all suck by arth1 · · Score: 2

    The real answer is "None of the Above" but put a gun to my head and the answer is clearly Apple. Why? I trust their profit motive the most. Apple just wants to sell me more Apple products and actually has a not completely terrible record with regard to privacy. All the others want to sell data about me to third parties of unknown reliability. Amazon would be the next option, again because of their profit motive which is to sell me physical and digital stuff. Google and Facebook I don't trust at all. They are advertising companies start to finish and I have no interest in cooperating with that.

    I'd take any Chinese company over Apple. The reason is that you can be fairly certain that they eavesdrop, but that it's the Chinese government that controls it. And they have no interest in private individuals who don't know anything that might benefit them, and certainly won't hand data over to bad apples in US law enforcement or US political factions.
    With Apple or any US based company, that's not a given.

  10. Re:The actual product name... by PPH · · Score: 2

    Oh come on now. You're just Putin us on.

    --
    Have gnu, will travel.
  11. Re:Facebook sez... by srmalloy · · Score: 2

    The problem, as I see it, is that you are misconstruing what Facebook is. Facebook's business model depends on getting the users of its social media system to willingly (and also, as it appears, unwittingly) reveal personal and private information about themselves so that information can be sold to other business to use for their marketing. As such, you are not a customer of Facebook; you are its product. The companies Facebook sells your information (and access to, by serving as a platform to feed you targeted ads) to are its customers. As such, your desire not to have targeted ads presented to you is irrelevant to Facebook, except insofar as the lack of ability to opt out of targeted advertising causes a mass exodus of Facebook participants, which would negatively impact its bottom line.