I don't know who the author of the article is but in the very last paragraph he says that with both Google and Facebook the voice snippets were directly connected to a user account. In the case of Facebook it may have been in fact I believe they were even given first names. the As for Google and voice transcription it was handled exactly as it is with Apple as far as I've seen written: Anonymized and not connected to an identifiable account.
Unless the author has additional information otherwise that assertion should be corrected as it would be misleading readers if left as is.
If I recall the earlier article correctly, this isn't the case. The other tech companies included customer ID or IP address along with the data whereas Apple only included a randomly generated ID.
You should read again. The means of identification would be the same as it is for Apple: Something heard in the voice snippet, not anything supplied by either Google or Apple.
I was referring to a different, earlier article about these issues, specifically addressing this statement of yours "As for Google and voice transcription it was handled exactly as it is with Apple as far as I've seen written: Anonymized and not connected to an identifiable account. "
Specifically, Google wasn't complying with acceptable protocols for anonymizing data while Apple was.
That's yet another claim I've not seen. Where did you see that Google wasn't anonymizing data, stripping out the Google ID as Apple strips out the Apple ID, before submitting it for transcription by an outside contractor just as Apple does?
Apple doesn’t strip out AppleID data, it’s not there in the first place, Siri has its own anonymous ID. Location and contacts are processed on device, Siri servers instruct the device to perform directions/calls.
I didn’t even look for Apple’s Siri privacy page, it was front and center on my AppleTV on settings. I did search out the Siri white paper and it was an easy read, I have no worries.
I don't know who the author of the article is but in the very last paragraph he says that with both Google and Facebook the voice snippets were directly connected to a user account. In the case of Facebook it may have been in fact I believe they were even given first names. the As for Google and voice transcription it was handled exactly as it is with Apple as far as I've seen written: Anonymized and not connected to an identifiable account.
Unless the author has additional information otherwise that assertion should be corrected as it would be misleading readers if left as is.
If I recall the earlier article correctly, this isn't the case. The other tech companies included customer ID or IP address along with the data whereas Apple only included a randomly generated ID.
You should read again. The means of identification would be the same as it is for Apple: Something heard in the voice snippet, not anything supplied by either Google or Apple.
I was referring to a different, earlier article about these issues, specifically addressing this statement of yours "As for Google and voice transcription it was handled exactly as it is with Apple as far as I've seen written: Anonymized and not connected to an identifiable account. "
Specifically, Google wasn't complying with acceptable protocols for anonymizing data while Apple was.
That's yet another claim I've not seen. Where did you see that Google wasn't anonymizing data, stripping out the Google ID as Apple strips out the Apple ID, before submitting it for transcription by an outside contractor just as Apple does?
Apple doesn’t strip out AppleID data, it’s not there in the first place, Siri has its own anonymous ID. Location and contacts are processed on device, Siri servers instruct the device to perform directions/calls.
I didn’t even look for Apple’s Siri privacy page, it was front and center on my AppleTV on settings. I did search out the Siri white paper and it was an easy read, I have no worries.
And in general you shouldn't.
Apple uses outside contractors. Google uses outside contractors. It would be better if they did not even tho the recordings are not connected to a user account with either companies transcription efforts. It's anonymized. The only potential issue and you yourself may have mentioned it in connection with the Google transcription story that preceded Apple's.: Some recordings include the speaker mentioning an address, or a name, or an employer, or some other fairly unique stuff so that the voice owner could potentially be identified by a contractor's employee or by another party he supplies the information too for whatever reason. That's what happened in the Google dustup. A rogue contracted individual stole several hundred recordings and gave them to a news organization. Could have been worse of course and there may be nothing (up until now at least) that would have prevented an Apple contractor from doing the same. Potentially identifiable data has been moved out of Apple's direct control just as it was in the case of Google and the stolen anonymized data.
Hopefully both companies will do some modifying and bring these types of "research to improve services" in-house instead of relying on honest employees at a contractor. People don't always do the right thing. Reduce the chances.
There are more serious things with Siri than this Guardian clickbait. I changed Siri's voice on my iphone X to British female. For several months, out of the blue she'll startle me by blurting a repeat of prior day personal response. Often comes when recharging via MBP. Also noticed degradation of Siri direction prowess on maps. But still a grace period for new Siri team. many users like my 23 year old EE friend never use Siri and still addicted to Apple. But I think siri and ML will be key to Apple's stature-- good or bad--five years from now.
I too as an American in the US use British female Siri exclusively (it’s great, my favorite by far) and I don’t have this issue on my iPhoneX, CarPlay and HomePod. Maybe it’s something else?
gatorguy said: Things are not always as black and white, good guys vs. evil others, as they are sometimes portrayed here.
Well said. We Apple users need to be careful, as this whole privacy thing, IMO, is driven more by marketing and Apple's lower need to exploit it. If that changes, I doubt Apple will have a 2nd thought about changing things, as all the 'core belief' stuff is most likely just marketing at this point. And, Apple is starting to venture more and more into things which could benefit from exploiting it, unfortunately.
knowitall said: One reason for not wanting to have a Tesla Model 3 is that “your data are belong to us (Tesla)”, which is of course completely unacceptable (Tesla searches your info to see if your to blame in case of an accident ...).
I'm curious if you can buy a Tesla w/o this stuff, or turn it off? I know Autopilot is optional, but I'm really wanting (when I do get into an EV) more of a 'dumb' one. I think EV technology is awesome, but unfortunately it seems like it is a bit too coupled with all this AI baloney and 'next-gen' auto-tech garbage. Just give me a fun, AWD electric drivetrain vehicle with a nice stereo, and I'll be happy.
Perhaps the key issue for this whistleblower, as it is for me, is that outside contractors, not Apple employees, are doing the manual review. Big difference in my book.
Exactly. And, it isn't that I trust an Apple employee more than an outside contractor... it's that there is a reason all these companies are using outside contractors for this kind of thing. (ie. offload liability, hide it more, etc.)
Have you heard about some of the awful things happening to the poor slobs contracted to pretend to be the 'AI' keeping the garbage off the social platforms?
gatorguy said: They were not forgiving then and generally claiming Apple would do no such thing.
Now with Apple discovered to be doing just as Google does (please no longer, bring it in house), sharing potentially identifiable data with outside 3rd parties even if not directly tied to a User ID and legally "anonymized", is it equally as evil or alternatively as much a non-story as perceived when it was other companies in the spotlight?
I can't remember what I said, but I'm sure I condemned Google for it. Likewise, I'm condemning Apple for it. But, I'm in that camp of not having thought Apple would be doing something like this.
I guess I knew someone there would have to be sampling some anonymized examples, as that's how AI works (ie. there is no intelligence, it's people training the algos). And, it's impossible to do that kind of thing without possibly compromising private information, and since people aren't perfect and easily corrupted, there is danger even to this anonymizing that people (naively) seem to think might protect them.
What is surprising (and greatly disappointing) to me, is that they are pulling the 'outsource' trick.
Mike Wuerthele said: Considering neither Google nor Amazon added it to the terms of service until after it was discovered, and Apple has been doing informing the users since iOS 6 and then again on a privacy-centric page intended and written for public consumption, I'd say, yes, they have, much, much more than Google or Amazon or Microsoft.
Whether or not that's sufficient for any given user is in the air.
Yes, though 'informing' should be in scare-quotes.
macplusplus said: The permissions are in Settings/Siri and Search. Disable Hey Siri, disable Allow Siri when Locked and you’re clear.
Yep, I essentially do half of that, ie. disable when locked. That removes most of that issue, as my phone is locked most of the time. However, with the iPad, I'll probably just disable Siri, as I'm on it working more of the time (and Siri is mostly useless in that context anyway). I've never turned Siri on on my Mac (again, no use).
When you phone a call centre, they often tell you straight up that your call is being recorded “for the purposes of training” and ask for your consent.
Except they don't really ask for your consent. It's a condition of continuing to use the service.
Any chance this “whistleblower“ works for the FBI or NSA?
Could be, though they have their people inside all the major tech companies and social platforms. So, unless there is true end-to-end encryption, they have their ways to access the info anyway.
But, was your point that they want to 'out' Apple so we'll just be more open to going along with their plans (ie. well, our privacy is screwed anyway if even Apple isn't private, so let's just go along with the 'backdoor' stuff.)?
The issue has nothing to do with whether they are anonymized or not. The issue is permissions and disclosure. Period.
I expect we'll hear from Apple more on this.
FTA: "The main thrust of the report claims that Apple does not explicitly disclose to consumers that recordings are passed along to contractors -- but Apple does tell users that some queries are manually reviewed, and has since the release of the service. Despite the information having been public-facing for at least six iterations of iOS, the "whistleblower" advised that they were concerned over the lack of disclosure, especially considering the contents of some recordings containing "extremely sensitive personal information."
Where does it say that it is manually reviewed by outside contractors? Could you provide a link to that specific wording? Thanks.
"When you use Siri or Dictation, the things you say will be recorded and sent to Apple in order to convert what you say into text and to process your requests. Your device will also send Apple other information, such as your first name and nickname; the names, nicknames, and relationship with you (e.g., “my dad”) of your address book contacts; and song names in your collection (collectively, your “User Data”). All of this data is used to help Siri and Dictation understand you better and recognize what you say. It is not linked to other data that Apple may have from your use of other Apple services. By using Siri or Dictation, you agree and consent to Apple’s and its subsidiaries’ and agents’ transmission, collection, maintenance, processing, and use of this information, including your voice input and User Data, to provide and improve Siri, Dictation, and dictation functionality in other Apple products and services."
This sounds like an opportunity for Apple to further enhance the privacy of their products to have a Siri chip do the processing on-board and not have to send the data to Apple. They can put it in the Secure Space (whatever they called it) where the credit card numbers are stored.
That way, it's all kept secret!
"Hey Siri, what are my calendar appointments for next Thursday?"
Siri goes to all your calendars and reports out the events. Done.
"Hey Siri, What is the METARS report for KPAE?"
Siri has no idea what a METARS is, or what KPAE is, so it searches Duck Duck Go for the that query, and reports back "Weather at Paine Field Snohomish County Airport is ..."
Then, if Siri still can't figure it out, it calls the MotherShip, if the option for "verify data being sent to Apple" is checked (just made that up...) Siri asks if it is OK to send your voice recorded to Apple for analysis.
The issue has nothing to do with whether they are anonymized or not. The issue is permissions and disclosure. Period.
I expect we'll hear from Apple more on this.
FTA: "The main thrust of the report claims that Apple does not explicitly disclose to consumers that recordings are passed along to contractors -- but Apple does tell users that some queries are manually reviewed, and has since the release of the service. Despite the information having been public-facing for at least six iterations of iOS, the "whistleblower" advised that they were concerned over the lack of disclosure, especially considering the contents of some recordings containing "extremely sensitive personal information."
Where does it say that it is manually reviewed by outside contractors? Could you provide a link to that specific wording? Thanks.
"When you use Siri or Dictation, the things you say will be recorded and sent to Apple in order to convert what you say into text and to process your requests. Your device will also send Apple other information, such as your first name and nickname; the names, nicknames, and relationship with you (e.g., “my dad”) of your address book contacts; and song names in your collection (collectively, your “User Data”). All of this data is used to help Siri and Dictation understand you better and recognize what you say. It is not linked to other data that Apple may have from your use of other Apple services. By using Siri or Dictation, you agree and consent to Apple’s and its subsidiaries’ and agents’ transmission, collection, maintenance, processing, and use of this information, including your voice input and User Data, to provide and improve Siri, Dictation, and dictation functionality in other Apple products and services."
This sounds like an opportunity for Apple to further enhance the privacy of their products to have a Siri chip do the processing on-board and not have to send the data to Apple. They can put it in the Secure Space (whatever they called it) where the credit card numbers are stored.
That way, it's all kept secret!
"Hey Siri, what are my calendar appointments for next Thursday?"
Siri goes to all your calendars and reports out the events. Done.
"Hey Siri, What is the METARS report for KPAE?"
Siri has no idea what a METARS is, or what KPAE is, so it searches Duck Duck Go for the that query, and reports back "Weather at Paine Field Snohomish County Airport is ..."
Then, if Siri still can't figure it out, it calls the MotherShip, if the option for "verify data being sent to Apple" is checked (just made that up...) Siri asks if it is OK to send your voice recorded to Apple for analysis.
That's the direction some of the voice assistants are taking now, processing account and device related voice requests on device rather than making a journey to cloud servers to process and send back to your phone. It's also up to 10x faster than relying on cloud servers which no one will complain about .
I have little doubt it's Apple's plan too, probably sooner rather than later especially considering recent privacy issues making the rounds involving all the techs. IMHO with the recent efforts Apple has put into Siri they can't be far off from having the speech-recognition model compact and reliable enough to be phone-resident.
I don't know who the author of the article is but in the very last paragraph he says that with both Google and Facebook the voice snippets were directly connected to a user account. In the case of Facebook it may have been in fact I believe they were even given first names. the As for Google and voice transcription it was handled exactly as it is with Apple as far as I've seen written: Anonymized and not connected to an identifiable account.
Unless the author has additional information otherwise that assertion should be corrected as it would be misleading readers if left as is.
If what you say is true — and I recall people here (including me), as well as the media, being bent out of shape about Google and Facebook on this issue — then, in all fairness, what Apple is doing here is no different from what they are doing.
If so, there’s little doubt that we’ll be hearing a lot more about this.
I expect you will hear NO more about it. The story was held until late on a Friday, Apple issued a very brief un-detailed statement amounting to four sentences, and I'm sure has done what they can with their media contracts to minimize and dismiss the story. In general no news mentions since Friday so it seems it was a successful effort. Despite the predictions from a couple of posters that this would be all over the blogs and news for a week it registered barely a peep and no comment from Apple since.
Perhaps the key issue for this whistleblower, as it is for me, is that outside contractors, not Apple employees, are doing the manual review. Big difference in my book.
Germany today said they were opening an investigation of Google for using humans to listen to and transcribe otherwise anonymized voice snippets that might include personal information, ie names, addresses etc. That could be a violation of EU privacy laws. Until the investigation is complete Google will cease using humans to transcribe voice recordings originating with EU-located citizens.
Google is apparently the scapegoat case for Apple and Amazon. The EU has a special place in their heart for US techs, the richer the better and Google being the current leader in financial reserves gets them special attention.
knowitall said: One reason for not wanting to have a Tesla Model 3 is that “your data are belong to us (Tesla)”, which is of course completely unacceptable (Tesla searches your info to see if your to blame in case of an accident ...).
I'm curious if you can buy a Tesla w/o this stuff, or turn it off? I know Autopilot is optional, but I'm really wanting (when I do get into an EV) more of a 'dumb' one. I think EV technology is awesome, but unfortunately it seems like it is a bit too coupled with all this AI baloney and 'next-gen' auto-tech garbage. Just give me a fun, AWD electric drivetrain vehicle with a nice stereo, and I'll be happy.
I don't know. My guess is that this isn't an option. I read several cases which made clear that Tesla uses the data as it sees fit and when it wants. Its also used to get Tesla of the hook with accidents (user error, so you're fucked up). But to be sure we have to ask Elon about it.
Edit: Tesla also uses video form all cars it made to 'train' its AI drive mode.
Comments
I didn’t even look for Apple’s Siri privacy page, it was front and center on my AppleTV on settings. I did search out the Siri white paper and it was an easy read, I have no worries.
Apple uses outside contractors. Google uses outside contractors. It would be better if they did not even tho the recordings are not connected to a user account with either companies transcription efforts. It's anonymized. The only potential issue and you yourself may have mentioned it in connection with the Google transcription story that preceded Apple's.:
Some recordings include the speaker mentioning an address, or a name, or an employer, or some other fairly unique stuff so that the voice owner could potentially be identified by a contractor's employee or by another party he supplies the information too for whatever reason. That's what happened in the Google dustup. A rogue contracted individual stole several hundred recordings and gave them to a news organization. Could have been worse of course and there may be nothing (up until now at least) that would have prevented an Apple contractor from doing the same. Potentially identifiable data has been moved out of Apple's direct control just as it was in the case of Google and the stolen anonymized data.
Hopefully both companies will do some modifying and bring these types of "research to improve services" in-house instead of relying on honest employees at a contractor. People don't always do the right thing. Reduce the chances.
I'm curious if you can buy a Tesla w/o this stuff, or turn it off? I know Autopilot is optional, but I'm really wanting (when I do get into an EV) more of a 'dumb' one. I think EV technology is awesome, but unfortunately it seems like it is a bit too coupled with all this AI baloney and 'next-gen' auto-tech garbage. Just give me a fun, AWD electric drivetrain vehicle with a nice stereo, and I'll be happy.
Exactly. And, it isn't that I trust an Apple employee more than an outside contractor... it's that there is a reason all these companies are using outside contractors for this kind of thing. (ie. offload liability, hide it more, etc.)
Have you heard about some of the awful things happening to the poor slobs contracted to pretend to be the 'AI' keeping the garbage off the social platforms?
I can't remember what I said, but I'm sure I condemned Google for it. Likewise, I'm condemning Apple for it. But, I'm in that camp of not having thought Apple would be doing something like this.
I guess I knew someone there would have to be sampling some anonymized examples, as that's how AI works (ie. there is no intelligence, it's people training the algos). And, it's impossible to do that kind of thing without possibly compromising private information, and since people aren't perfect and easily corrupted, there is danger even to this anonymizing that people (naively) seem to think might protect them.
What is surprising (and greatly disappointing) to me, is that they are pulling the 'outsource' trick.
Yes, though 'informing' should be in scare-quotes.
Yep, I essentially do half of that, ie. disable when locked. That removes most of that issue, as my phone is locked most of the time. However, with the iPad, I'll probably just disable Siri, as I'm on it working more of the time (and Siri is mostly useless in that context anyway). I've never turned Siri on on my Mac (again, no use).
Except they don't really ask for your consent. It's a condition of continuing to use the service.
But, was your point that they want to 'out' Apple so we'll just be more open to going along with their plans (ie. well, our privacy is screwed anyway if even Apple isn't private, so let's just go along with the 'backdoor' stuff.)?
I have little doubt it's Apple's plan too, probably sooner rather than later especially considering recent privacy issues making the rounds involving all the techs. IMHO with the recent efforts Apple has put into Siri they can't be far off from having the speech-recognition model compact and reliable enough to be phone-resident.
Google is apparently the scapegoat case for Apple and Amazon. The EU has a special place in their heart for US techs, the richer the better and Google being the current leader in financial reserves gets them special attention.
I read several cases which made clear that Tesla uses the data as it sees fit and when it wants.
Its also used to get Tesla of the hook with accidents (user error, so you're fucked up).
But to be sure we have to ask Elon about it.
Edit: Tesla also uses video form all cars it made to 'train' its AI drive mode.