Ask HN: How can this happen without the phone covertly listening?
Long story shortish... yesterday we were sitting around the table enjoying our Easter lunch with extended family. Someone else was mentioning a new family at their church and I caught the first names in passing. At first it didn't click but then I said, 'oh are you talking about X & Y Smith? They used to go to abc church and lived in our neighborhood briefly.' Turns out they were.
Fast forward an hour or so and the kids were playing outside. I took a picture of a friend pushing the kids on the swing and went to send it to the friend. I pressed send, Messages and typed out the first 3 letters of her name. The Messages app showed 2 'autocompletions,' the friend I was intending and the woman I had mentioned an hour before!
- the 3 letters that I typed were NOT in the 'Y Smiths' name! - my phone was in my pocket when I uttered the name - I am pretty sure I only said their name once, but could have said it twice - I have not sent 'Y Smith' a text in at least 4 years - I have not called 'Y Smith' in at least 4 years - I was shocked I even had 'Y Smith' contact info in my address book - I have 'hey Siri' turned OFF
WTF?! How is this possible without the device selectively listening for random words and matching against a profile that includes my address book?
72 comments
[ 3.3 ms ] story [ 144 ms ] threadPeople talk about something, never look it up, never search for it, never try to buy it, but they see ads for it.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frequency_illusion
It certainly would, if you cannot figure out why a query returns an apparently fully unrelated record.
Did they happen to add them to their contacts recently or send the X&Y Smiths a message about you?
There have been far too many “anecdotal” examples of me mentioning some thing/product out loud, never searching for anything related to it and then seeing ads for it over the next few days.
I resisted the conspiracy theory type explanation but it just occurs too often to be some sort of Baader-Meinhof phenomenon.
Hmmm... is awareness of the Baader-Meinhof phenomena leading to an increase in its own phenomena because one actively tries to disprove it by deliberately noticing an even greater frequency due to their own awareness of it?
Lets stop giving these apps a pass. We already know some abuse privileged signing keys to access permissions without asking or a permission is used for other things like third party packages
It seems possible that a phone might be continually listening to background chatter and trying to extract salient/useful pieces of information to then feed into predictive assistants... but honestly that seems like a lot of computational work (especially on a device known for excellent use of its power budget), and a lot of development work. All for a very small incremental improvement in assistant UX that is probably not going to be noticed by most people.
Another non-tinfoil explanation would be cross matching a lot of data from here and there (for example, if you had some event in calender with their names or their name was in some message/text even if you haven't called them for years) and might got its way in there too. There is probably much more going on that I don't even know, too.
The point is: while it could be phone listening, it can very well be a result of some huge data processing on your device without listening too.
edit: oh, having read the other comments, coincidence/selective bias is even more likely than anything I've written.
That's _barely_ any better. That's essentially the behavior that's being complained about but implemented a different way.
There was a similar conspiracy when I was in the army, about phones being able to be eavesdropped/wiretapped even when turned off. In short - they can't, but people always believed there was some super secret way to do that
That's one possible way to implement a feature like this. Ruling out this mechanism doesn't rule out any others.
Nobody is auditing the baseband firmware blobs, and with non-removable batteries phones are never really turned off. I would be surprised if the NSA doesn't have a backdoor in it. Pure conjecture, of course, but the alphabet soup boys have the motivation, the ability, and the history, of getting their backdoors put into tech.
I really wish I had cloned it locally, I don't know why I didn't.
and your conclusion is that this is audio data being misused!?
We chose a random thing I've never purchased, looked at, or have any interest in: "lawnmowers".
We put my phone on the table and said lawnmowers a lot, waited a few minutes, then I went to a website I know that has a lot of ads (Notebook Check - not that it matters).
Then I scrolled down and waited for an ad to load and it was FOR A LAWNMOWER. I don't even have a lawn!
And then the data brokers share this with all the other apps
Every app creator can honestly say “noo we dont listen wdym” to you, to Congress, to everyone
and the analytics package creator and data brokers are going to be laughing for decades
Now on Android there is a green light when the mic is on so presumably that would catch this? Unless it is at the OS level
Glad to see someone else asking themselves this question, I've found myself in exactly this situation a number of times in recent years.
If you are in the same room as a cohort of people, if one or more people had been searching or messaging the X & Y Smiths, then by geolocation since you all attend the same church, you're associated as potentially interested, especially considering you already had their details saved.
There are also fuzzy logic factors, like maybe those three letters weren't in their name but were in their phone number (each number corresponds to several alphabet characters), or might have been in a message you've long since deleted but is still in your autocomplete index which combined with the geolocation weighting could have caused it to pop up as an option.
In these instances it might appear your phone is listening, but you were in the same room as some people who were probably also interested in that family, had their data in your history, and being a new connection could have boosted its relevance too. (I just saw someone else also answered that you probably only noticed this event because of the conversation, or the Baader–Meinhof phenomenon, which is also plausible)
Not saying definitively that your phone was not covertly listening but our devices are capturing and correlating a massive amount of dimensions related to our behaviours at all times, so it's not beyond reason that enough of these factors lined up to cause the autocomplete engine to suggest it as a reasonable option.
Interesting idea about the mapping of numbers to letters, oh how I miss 800-call-sal advertisements.
But I am pretty sure this was just a proximity match. When you're dealing with the quantity of telemetry the big players deal with, you're talking billions of people in real-time all day long, then how do you figure out what's relevant and what isn't?
Physical proximity is important. You don't have to swap contacts with someone for your telemetry to connect you with them. I mean you were right next to someone who was right next to them, out of billions of people you're relevant, so no one needs to share contact details. The manufacturer of the phone knows your geolocation. Your telecom company knows your geolocation. If you have bluetooth or wifi switched on and you're already fingerprinted, then every chain store knows your geolocation. If you use a credit card or eftpos card anywhere, the products you purchase are combined into your profile, etc etc.
That and you already had them in your contact list (even though you were surprised they were, you're not saying they weren't, I have people in my contact list from 15 years ago I only spoke with one time...), they already know that you've bumped into this contact before in the past, and boost the recommendation because you shared the contact and the geospatial relevance in a short period of time.
Like I'm pretty cynical and suspicious at the best of times, but once I started to realise the above, all my "oh shit they're listening" moments kind of dissolved because I could trace all of them back to being in the same room as someone who had met a person, or had been actively searching a related topic in the past few days.
Yeah it's still spooky, it's the reason I run a pi-hole, and got myself off most social media.
Also I noticed this thread got flagged. Not sure exactly why but I think it's because this same subject has come up a few times. I do think people need to better understand how network analysis can reveal spooky shit about our behaviours, like our devices don't need to be literally listening to our words in order for corporations and governments to know exactly who we are or what we're about. There's tons of different signals we all send out each day that fingerprint exactly who we are, who we're related to, and what we care about, they don't need realtime voice processing.
Thanks for laying out a very plausible case for how this match could occur without actually listening to the ambient conversation.
I also run a pi-hole at home and almost never visit social media. Frankly I am surprised it took this long for people to understand how giving up their privacy had a cost, I was hoping the backlash against Facebook et al was going to start a decade ago.
Right after bringing some trivial detail into consciousness, there is a period of time where we are more aware about this arbitrary piece of data. Our brain is a pattern-matching machine, so it does the rest.
Want to know if it was the iPhone spying on you? Follow the somewhat scientific (ish) method and take note of absolutely all autocomplete suggestions and make a conscious effort to realize how much relevance they had every time. That way you'll learn to differentiate "coincidence" from coincidence.
Apple could have an almost complete social graph. If Y Smith is the common acquaintance between you and your friend, then it would be the best second suggestion if you want to share something in that part of your social graph.
The Analytics tools know so much about you that they can actually predict what you're thinking much of the time. They know the new family went to your church and know you would likely talk about it.
So, we chose X. Neither of us play or follow X in any way. It's not something we'd search for or anything related to it. But we experimented with talking about X and at least one famous Xer that we could name. With our phones on the table.
We never received any advertising about X.
Contrary to others’ experience, I couldn’t reproduce the “talk about X and wait for an ad on X” experiment, I believe it is mostly just the mentioned Frequency illusion, or perhaps some network level thing like A and B talk about something, B later searches for that and “rightfully” get ads on it, and due to A and B’s similar profile or something A also get recommended said product.