▲ 293 ▼ Thanks to Siri Recaps, your Apple Watch is always listening as you go about your day — but Apple may be risking a Meta Glasses-style backlash (www.techradar.com) submitted 2 days ago by fusspilz@feddit.org to c/technology@lemmy.world 47 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[–] ZebulonP@lemmy.world 60 points 1 day ago (14 children) How does this not violate 2-party consent? permalink fedilink source hideshow 14 child comments replies: [–] JustEnoughDucks@feddit.nl 42 points 1 day ago (1 child) Corporations are allowed to do whatever they want, whenever they want. There might be a few tiny consequences 10-20 years later that shaves a couple months of profit down, but that is just the cost of business and massive profits for the rest of the time. Hope this helps! permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Doomsider@lemmy.world 3 points 21 hours ago Just like all these AI companies tracking people, totally illegal and gross violation of privacy but the government could give a rip. You break a law? Go straight to jail! Corporation breaks a law? Ohhh well! permalink fedilink source parent [–] thatOneGuy@aussie.zone 4 points 1 day ago (4 children) There is probably some technicality in that since it doesn’t record audio, but rather just keeps a transcription - that it might not fall afoul of two-party consent? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] spizzat2@lemmy.zip 15 points 1 day ago (3 children) Even if it is only temporarily stored to RAM for processing, I struggle to see how that doesn't still count as "recording". permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] thatOneGuy@aussie.zone 6 points 1 day ago (2 children) It probably wouldn’t meet the strict legal definition, as no copy (physical or digital) is left behind for any period of time - as RAM is volatile and its contents disappear on power cycle. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] LodeMike@lemmy.today 1 point 22 hours ago The Hey Siri does the same thing it's just all on-device. permalink fedilink source parent [–] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 5 points 1 day ago Or it probably would, they just have no plan to stop it unless they get sued and a judge forces them permalink fedilink source parent [–] isVeryLoud@lemmy.ca 6 points 1 day ago (6 children) Not every country or country subdivision has two party consent. Canada is a one party consent legislation. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] dogslayeggs@lemmy.world 4 points 1 day ago (1 child) The question was not "what countries do not have two party consent?" The question was "how does this not violate two party consent?" permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] isVeryLoud@lemmy.ca 3 points 1 day ago It violates it permalink fedilink source parent [–] ZebulonP@lemmy.world 13 points 1 day ago (3 children) I understand that. What about the places that do? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] TheHobbyist@lemmy.zip 1 point 1 day ago I'm guessing they'll put the responsibility on the user to only activate it when it has the consent of people around it or something... permalink fedilink source parent [–] Arcane2077@sh.itjust.works 1 point 1 day ago Won’t exist there permalink fedilink source parent [–] isVeryLoud@lemmy.ca 0 points 1 day ago They can disable it based on geolocation, or like others said, put the onus on the user to know best. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] JustEnoughDucks@feddit.nl 42 points 1 day ago (1 child) Corporations are allowed to do whatever they want, whenever they want. There might be a few tiny consequences 10-20 years later that shaves a couple months of profit down, but that is just the cost of business and massive profits for the rest of the time. Hope this helps! permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Doomsider@lemmy.world 3 points 21 hours ago Just like all these AI companies tracking people, totally illegal and gross violation of privacy but the government could give a rip. You break a law? Go straight to jail! Corporation breaks a law? Ohhh well! permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Doomsider@lemmy.world 3 points 21 hours ago Just like all these AI companies tracking people, totally illegal and gross violation of privacy but the government could give a rip. You break a law? Go straight to jail! Corporation breaks a law? Ohhh well! permalink fedilink source parent
[–] thatOneGuy@aussie.zone 4 points 1 day ago (4 children) There is probably some technicality in that since it doesn’t record audio, but rather just keeps a transcription - that it might not fall afoul of two-party consent? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] spizzat2@lemmy.zip 15 points 1 day ago (3 children) Even if it is only temporarily stored to RAM for processing, I struggle to see how that doesn't still count as "recording". permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] thatOneGuy@aussie.zone 6 points 1 day ago (2 children) It probably wouldn’t meet the strict legal definition, as no copy (physical or digital) is left behind for any period of time - as RAM is volatile and its contents disappear on power cycle. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] LodeMike@lemmy.today 1 point 22 hours ago The Hey Siri does the same thing it's just all on-device. permalink fedilink source parent [–] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 5 points 1 day ago Or it probably would, they just have no plan to stop it unless they get sued and a judge forces them permalink fedilink source parent
[–] spizzat2@lemmy.zip 15 points 1 day ago (3 children) Even if it is only temporarily stored to RAM for processing, I struggle to see how that doesn't still count as "recording". permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] thatOneGuy@aussie.zone 6 points 1 day ago (2 children) It probably wouldn’t meet the strict legal definition, as no copy (physical or digital) is left behind for any period of time - as RAM is volatile and its contents disappear on power cycle. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] LodeMike@lemmy.today 1 point 22 hours ago The Hey Siri does the same thing it's just all on-device. permalink fedilink source parent [–] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 5 points 1 day ago Or it probably would, they just have no plan to stop it unless they get sued and a judge forces them permalink fedilink source parent
[–] thatOneGuy@aussie.zone 6 points 1 day ago (2 children) It probably wouldn’t meet the strict legal definition, as no copy (physical or digital) is left behind for any period of time - as RAM is volatile and its contents disappear on power cycle. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] LodeMike@lemmy.today 1 point 22 hours ago The Hey Siri does the same thing it's just all on-device. permalink fedilink source parent [–] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 5 points 1 day ago Or it probably would, they just have no plan to stop it unless they get sued and a judge forces them permalink fedilink source parent
[–] LodeMike@lemmy.today 1 point 22 hours ago The Hey Siri does the same thing it's just all on-device. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 5 points 1 day ago Or it probably would, they just have no plan to stop it unless they get sued and a judge forces them permalink fedilink source parent
[–] isVeryLoud@lemmy.ca 6 points 1 day ago (6 children) Not every country or country subdivision has two party consent. Canada is a one party consent legislation. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] dogslayeggs@lemmy.world 4 points 1 day ago (1 child) The question was not "what countries do not have two party consent?" The question was "how does this not violate two party consent?" permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] isVeryLoud@lemmy.ca 3 points 1 day ago It violates it permalink fedilink source parent [–] ZebulonP@lemmy.world 13 points 1 day ago (3 children) I understand that. What about the places that do? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] TheHobbyist@lemmy.zip 1 point 1 day ago I'm guessing they'll put the responsibility on the user to only activate it when it has the consent of people around it or something... permalink fedilink source parent [–] Arcane2077@sh.itjust.works 1 point 1 day ago Won’t exist there permalink fedilink source parent [–] isVeryLoud@lemmy.ca 0 points 1 day ago They can disable it based on geolocation, or like others said, put the onus on the user to know best. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] dogslayeggs@lemmy.world 4 points 1 day ago (1 child) The question was not "what countries do not have two party consent?" The question was "how does this not violate two party consent?" permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] isVeryLoud@lemmy.ca 3 points 1 day ago It violates it permalink fedilink source parent
[–] ZebulonP@lemmy.world 13 points 1 day ago (3 children) I understand that. What about the places that do? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] TheHobbyist@lemmy.zip 1 point 1 day ago I'm guessing they'll put the responsibility on the user to only activate it when it has the consent of people around it or something... permalink fedilink source parent [–] Arcane2077@sh.itjust.works 1 point 1 day ago Won’t exist there permalink fedilink source parent [–] isVeryLoud@lemmy.ca 0 points 1 day ago They can disable it based on geolocation, or like others said, put the onus on the user to know best. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] TheHobbyist@lemmy.zip 1 point 1 day ago I'm guessing they'll put the responsibility on the user to only activate it when it has the consent of people around it or something... permalink fedilink source parent
[–] isVeryLoud@lemmy.ca 0 points 1 day ago They can disable it based on geolocation, or like others said, put the onus on the user to know best. permalink fedilink source parent