316 points
*

Techbros really went full police state just to deliver ads I wouldn’t click on straight into my adblocker

permalink
report
reply
159 points

You’d be surprised how many people raw dog the internet.

permalink
report
parent
reply
70 points

It’s terrifying

permalink
report
parent
reply

I see people doing it and its terrifying.

permalink
report
parent
reply
55 points

Even people you’d really expect to use adblockers. A good example is right here on Lemmy, people here are generally pretty tech-savvy yet you get threads with lots of people complaining about ads. This has been a weird lesson as I get older, seeing that most people somehow don’t even think about lifting a finger to fix things they see as problems, they really just complain and then do absolutely nothing to help themselves. It’s the same with if someone mentions something they don’t know what it is, instead of taking 5 seconds to just look it up they comment to ask about it and then never reply to people answering their question. I’m certain that it’s very common to have some weird need to make others do work for you, they don’t actually care about finding out what something is or how to do something to fix a problem, they just care about making others spend any kind of effort for them.

permalink
report
parent
reply
26 points

They’re called help vampires in the programming world.

https://communitymgt.fandom.com/wiki/Help_Vampire

permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points

Dude. Paragraphs.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

I work as a software engineer with other software engineers. Even software engineers and UX designers using the internet that way. Talented ones. Many of them - maybe the majority. It takes me a second to get over my astonishment when they share their screens. Not only astonishment at how overboard ads have gotten w/o an adblocker, but also that this particular person doesn’t use an adblocker.

So many people aren’t well-informed about what ad networks or doing, or how different the web experience could be.

permalink
report
parent
reply
22 points
*

I have a friend that pays Google a YouTube tax every month… He tells me he wants to support the creators.

I’m just kind of sad for him… I tried to explain direct donations were a million times more effective, but he clearly just doesn’t want to learn how to use an adblocker.

This guy is like 30 years old.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Do you mean YouTube premium? Old YouTube music because they’re different things I think premium includes music actually but you can just have the music subscription.

Youtube music is actually better than something like Spotify for creators, so it’s not the worst justification in the world.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Why in the world would you think that someone paying to use a service is a problem? Sure direct donations are more helpful, but that doesn’t run servers to actually distribute the content you’re viewing. Your problem is completely different than what we are discussing about ad blockers.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

It’s about to be a lot more with the chrome manifest update. I got my dad into chrome some 15 years ago and explaining why he should switch to Firefox is completely confusing for him. He thinks his own business listing on Google won’t work if he’s not using Chrome.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points
*

I’ve had people that refuse to use an adblocker because “the creators deserve to get paid”. Well, your funeral if you get malvertising…

permalink
report
parent
reply
123 points

Recent versions of Android make it much more difficult for a background app to access the microphone. There will be a notification if any background app is using the mic or camera.

permalink
report
reply
22 points

Yup, the green dot top right

permalink
report
parent
reply
13 points

Now if there was only an easy way to get to the offending app to identify it

permalink
report
parent
reply
28 points

Pull open quick settings and tap the dot.

permalink
report
parent
reply
15 points

Supposedly more difficult.

Android likes selling ads too, why would google want to stop ad blocking microphne access?

permalink
report
parent
reply
130 points
*

Google’s “Now playing” feature constantly listens to what’s going on in the background to show you what songs are playing. They claim this is done with a local database of song “fingerprints”. The feature does not show the microphone indicator because: “…Now Playing is protected by Android’s Private Compute Core…”

I’m not saying that other, non-google, app do this to my knowledge; but the fact that this is a thing is honestly a bit scary.

Edit: screenshot of the “Now Playing” feature

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

I have seen said feature being mentioned or brought to other android versions whether with apps or modules, do they work the same way?

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

I’m not sure how other apps or android versions work. This is a flaw with the closed source software ecosystem.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-3 points

Why is that scary to you?

permalink
report
parent
reply
37 points

What other apps use Google’s “Android Private Compute Core” and therefore don’t show mic or camera usage notifications? Not trying to sound all tinfoil hat here, but seriously: can apps other than those from Google use the “Android Private Compute Core”? Even if only Google’s own apps can use the “Android Private Compute Core”, we can’t see the source code for Google’s apps as (far as I know, anyway) they are not open source. If an app is not open source, we do not really know what the app is doing in the background; we’ll just have to take them at their word.

permalink
report
parent
reply
42 points

For what it’s worth, I did just test it with airplane mode and it still correctly identified the song playing. So at the very least, it’s not lying about using a local database to identify songs, at least when it is offline.

permalink
report
parent
reply
16 points

It also uses a cloud fingerprint database apparently according to the second paragraph:

If you turn on “Show search button on lock screen”, each time you tap to search Google receives a short, digital audio fingerprint to identify what’s playing.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

The thing is I really can’t see Google allowing anyone else access. They don’t even allow Android OEMs to have access

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

if this is used, or there is some whitelist that gives permission for background microphone use in voice interaction services, apps with tracking capabilities probably use some set of predefined keywords (hardcoded inside the app itself) and those can be triggered while being on standby/in background, when there is a match some pinging goes to outside servers…

permalink
report
parent
reply
16 points

Yeah, this sounds like a shareholder soapy titwank speech to me.

They’re bullshitting everyone including the people we hate.

permalink
report
parent
reply
59 points

“Meta does not use your phone’s microphone for ads and we’ve been public about this for years,” the statement read. “We are reaching out to CMG to get them to clarify that their program is not based on Meta data.”

Ah, yes. The tried and true defense of “we’ve denied it for years and continue to deny it” must be credible coming from a source as trustworthy as Facebook. I hear they’re planning on holding a press conference to pinky swear they’re not listening to the microphone they demand access to in order to show you ads that make them money.

permalink
report
reply
44 points

FWIW, this was debunked when CMG originally made the claim. It was a marketing guy overselling their product and they had to correct their statement. They use the same info data brokers collect, and phones actively listening to you is not true.

permalink
report
parent
reply
21 points

Even what they said could be true without applying to phones. They said “smart devices” a lot. They never said “smart phone”.

There are a lot of IoT devices, some of which have microphones, a lot less secure than either iPhone or Android.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

The fundamental question is, “Do you trust Facebook?” They have the resources to manipulate the story and twist the truth. They have the capability to spy on you with mics, but they say they don’t do so. Do you trust them?

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

No it was quite a lot more than “a marketing guy” - there were pages and pages of details about their Active Listening program on their website, investor presentations etc. They went far into detail about how much they could listen to and what they could do with all that audio data.

Here’s the Internet Archive link:

https://web.archive.org/web/20231116115055/https://www.cmglocalsolutions.com/cmg-active-listening

permalink
report
parent
reply
93 points
*

“Meta does not use your phone’s microphone for ads and we’ve been public about this for years,” the statement read.

Meanwhile:

permalink
report
reply
33 points

That is not the same thing as listening in the background.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points
*

Nobody said it was the same thing as listening in the background. It’s still relevant and important.

I trust that most adults understand the implications of an exploitable permission and a strong incentive to abuse it, as well as the track record of corporate denials.

permalink
report
parent
reply
19 points

Using the permission to record audio triggers an on-screen indicator that the mic is recording. Someone would probably notice it on 24/7 recording. Someone would have also by now found the constant stream of network traffic to send the audio to be analyzed, because they also aren’t doing that on-device.

permalink
report
parent
reply
25 points

Meta said it does not, but what about 3rd parties…

permalink
report
parent
reply
181 points

Not defending Facebook, but if you record a video with sound, then the FB app has to have permission to record your audio.

That said, delete Facebook. Fuck Zuck.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-33 points
*

if you record a video with sound, then the FB app has to have permission to record your audio.

I can’t tell if you’re trying to explain how it currently works (which I know very well, thanks) or asserting that the current behavior is necessary in order to record with sound.

It really doesn’t have to be as it is. The OS can provide a record-video API, complete with a user-controlled kill switch and an activity indicator, and the app can call it. The app doesn’t need direct access to the microphone to allow the user to create a file with sound.

Edit to clarify: I’m not saying that the “permission” doesn’t work as advertised. I’m saying that recording an audio file doesn’t have to require a permission system as coarse and disempowering to users as it is today. I guess the people clicking the downvote button misunderstood.

permalink
report
parent
reply
42 points

Pretty sure that qualifies for that permission.

But the whole point of doing so is to use it in the app, and you for sure can’t do that without the permission.

permalink
report
parent
reply
19 points

I downvoted because of the snark in first paragraph.

permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points

What a horrifying list of data collection. Fuck all that hahaha

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Why wouldn’t you want to share your fitness data with the company that will sell it to the company setting your health “insurance” premiums? </s>

permalink
report
parent
reply
33 points

I highly doubt that they actually managed to do this, at least any time recently.

As another commenter noted, Android alerts you when an app is accessing the microphone in the background, and it would also absolutely destroy the phones battery life more than the FB app currently does. The only way that we have the “Hey Google/Siri” command prompts active all the time is with custom hardware not available to the apps, and certainly not without Android knowing about it.

Maybe they actively listen while the app is open, but even then I think recent Android/iOS would let you know about that.

permalink
report
reply
11 points

As someone relatively ignorant about the mechanics of something like this, would it not make more sense that the app would be getting this data from the Android OS, with Google’s knowledge and cooperation?

The place I see the most unsettling ads (that seem to be driven by overheard conversation) tends to be the google feed itself, so it seems reasonable to me that they could be using and selling that information to others as well, and merely disguising how the data were acquired.

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

It would take a lot of data. On device voice processing is not very advanced. That’s why most voice stuff doesn’t work without a signal.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

That makes sense, but isn’t it assuming they’re processing data on the device? I would expect them to send raw audio back to be processed by Google ad services. Obviously it wouldn’t work without signal either, but that’s hardly a limitation.

As someone else pointed out, how does the google song recognition work? That’s active without triggering the light indicating audio recording, and is at least processing enough audio data to identify songs.

permalink
report
parent
reply
22 points

The place I see the most unsettling ads (that seem to be driven by overheard conversation)

There’s a simpler explanation – you’re in the same geospatial region or you’re connected to the same networks as the people you’re having conversations with, and those people also looked up the things they have conversations about.

If you have GPS, Wi-Fi, or (possibly) Bluetooth, then that’s how they can pretty easily associate you to those people.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

It’s a reasonable explanation, and what I typically assume to be true. Still, I’m curious about the actual mechanics, and if it potentially could be being done by Google without the larger tech industry being aware of it.

permalink
report
parent
reply
20 points

Google’s “Now playing” feature constantly listens to what’s going on in the background to show you what songs are playing. They claim this is done with a local database of song “fingerprints”. The feature does not show the microphone indicator because: “…Now Playing is protected by Android’s Private Compute Core…”

I’m not saying that other, non-google, app do this to my knowledge; but the fact that this is a thing is honestly a bit scary.

permalink
report
parent
reply

Technology

!technology@lemmy.world

Create post

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


Community stats

  • 17K

    Monthly active users

  • 12K

    Posts

  • 555K

    Comments