Comment by wakawaka28

1 year ago

>So how does the phone + ad networks decide which words to prioritize to trigger which ads when?

The same way they analyze your email and web searches. Basically, statistics.

>To me this is the problem with these anecdotal tests. You understood that that was an important phrase in the context of ad targeting. But how did the automated ad system know it should serve you ads on that topic, and not one of the many other advertisable topics you talk about over the course of several days? Or that your phone hears over several days?

Buddy, so many people have witnessed this happening for at least 10 years and even done experiments at this point that it's common knowledge. I know for a fact that one of my friends now has a phone that is especially receptive to hearing me say things around it, because our conversation topics ALWAYS come up in my searches, ads, and feeds shortly after. Think about that. Someone else's phone sends data to a cloud that I never gave permission to. It then puts that together with data from MY phone about where I was (perhaps even the devices chirping at each other!). The aggregation happens within a week then I see relevant ads. I've seen this happen dozens of times. It's no coincidence.

As far as the article, I'm not even going to read it. It's got to be stupid. We know from leaks, reverse-engineering, and personal experience that this spying is going on. I question the source of this article, but I suppose we should never underestimate the lengths someone will go to in order to feel that they are smarter than the rest of us with our eyes open.

24 comments

wakawaka28

Reply
simonw  1 year ago

"We know from leaks, reverse-engineering"

I would be VERY interested to hear details of those leaks and that reverse-engineering. I've only ever heard the personal anecdotes.

(If you'd read my article you would have seen this bit at the top: "Convincing people of this is basically impossible. It doesn’t matter how good your argument is, if someone has ever seen an ad that relates to their previous voice conversation they are likely convinced and there’s nothing you can do to talk them out of it.")

  • wakawaka28  1 year ago

    I truly wish I had a bibliography to give you but it has been so obviously true to me that I hadn't bothered to catalogue all of this information. I'll try to get you started though. Start by familiarizing yourself with the Snowden leaks and how the government buys data from private companies to violate the constitution. Second, look for articles like this one: https://www.pcworld.com/article/2450052/do-smartphones-liste... This kind of thing is published periodically. Apple lost a lawsuit over Siri spying "inadvertently" very recently: https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2025/01/apple-agrees-to-... There is no reason to believe that your phone is ever not listening. The audio can at least be transcribed and catalogued.

    If companies are willing to track your every click and mouse movement, every footstep and slight movement you make with your phone even while you are asleep, build and bundle keyboard apps to capture what you type, monitor you with AI, etc., are you seriously surprised that they would not also listen to you? None of that stuff I just described is fiction. It's established tech that has been documented over time. The only reason it's not 100% illegal is because the EULA probably covers it.

    I swear people who think they aren't listening when they can seem like people who would be shocked to learn that an armed carjacker might demand your wallet in addition to your car. Unreal...

    Oh yeah one more tip. Try to use the data export feature from Google or Facebook. You might just be surprised what you find. I've heard of people finding recordings of private conversations picked up by Google devices. I personally found hundreds of Facebook messages and posts that I deleted with a tool, and aren't visible to anyone (OK maybe the messages make sense but not the posts).

    • simonw  1 year ago

      > Apple lost a lawsuit over Siri spying "inadvertently" very recently

      That's what my article is about: it's about how I'm certain people will use this settled-out-of-court lawsuit as "evidence" that Apple are spying and targeting ads, but it's very clear that's not what was happening here.

      7 replies →

Suppafly  1 year ago

>We know from leaks, reverse-engineering, and personal experience that this spying is going on.

No we don't. There isn't any of that. This is flat earthing for technophiles.

  • brookst  1 year ago

    Good analogy. Just like anyone with a lick of sense can see the spherical Earth from an airplane, so can anyone see the absence of this network traffic from any network analyzer. It’s not there. It does not exist.

    And nevermind the conspiratorial thinking required to believe whole teams of engineers are developing and maintaining this capability across several giant companies, but nobody ever puts it on a resume. Apparently the thousands of people working on this are all personally committed to complete secrecy, forever. Uh-uh.

    • wakawaka28  1 year ago

      >And nevermind the conspiratorial thinking required to believe whole teams of engineers are developing and maintaining this capability across several giant companies, but nobody ever puts it on a resume. Apparently the thousands of people working on this are all personally committed to complete secrecy, forever. Uh-uh.

      Bro it doesn't matter how much evidence you provide people with that this IS happening. They usually won't accept it. If they do accept it, half the time they shrug it off with "I've got nothing to hide anyway" kind of cope.

      I seriously think I'm arguing with employees of these companies on HN because all you people do is deny everything and smear people who talk about this stuff. I hate to break it to you, but conspiracies are real. Noticing that people are conspiring to do things that nobody likes is not unreasonable in any way.

      3 replies →

    • monkeyfun  1 year ago

      I agree with most of this, but have to take note that

      >thousands of people working on this all personally committed to complete secrecy

      Basically describes a LOT of government spying programs or horrific abuses that have happened, for instance.

      Secrets can absolutely be held, and I wouldn't be surprised by even thousands of NDA'd engineers (who already have been doing this sort of thing for a loooong time) opting not to leak anything in a way that would be credible.

      I'll reiterate that I'm skeptical of the overall conspiracy claims even though I usually believe in mass spying claims or institutions/corps/etc. being awful. I just think your argument there is pretty flawed, at least that aspect of it.

      In fact, on why I'm skeptical: I just can't shake this profound sense that it's like the "Frequency Illusion" phenomenon that I've demonstrated to people while driving or walking outside.

      Or more likely a mix of it with people also getting prompted with what they "want" in the first place by all the advertising and targeted media and their various search history data.