News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:I still don't think companies serve you ads based on your... by wakawaka28 on Thursday January 02, 2025 @10:57PM (#42582229)
>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.

Re:I still don't think companies serve you ads based on your... by simonw on Friday January 03, 2025 @12:12AM (#42582691)
"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.")

Re:I still don't think companies serve you ads based on your... by wakawaka28 on Friday January 03, 2025 @12:35AM (#42582831)
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).

Re:I still don't think companies serve you ads based on your... by simonw on Friday January 03, 2025 @12:41AM (#42582865)
> 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.

Re:I still don't think companies serve you ads based on your... by wakawaka28 on Friday January 03, 2025 @12:51AM (#42582918)
Apple settled because they knew they would lose. Winning is good PR since they (falsely) claim to be favorable for privacy. They are only superficially better than Google in that regard. I did skim your article and it's not as bad as I thought. I think you really mean it when you say these are just coincidences. But they're not.

Another one I forgot to mention: Google explicitly tracks your location history unless you turn it off, and you'd be foolish to think that they won't (or couldn't) save the data anyway. People have done experiments showing dramatic improvements in battery life using AOSP without Google telemetry and spyware.

Re:I still don't think companies serve you ads based on your... by simonw on Friday January 03, 2025 @01:17AM (#42583049)
The Google track your location history thing is true. You can confirm by using Google takeout to extract your location history.

The microphone thing is false. You can try the takeout feature (or equivalent) across multiple providers to confirm that.

Re:I still don't think companies serve you ads based on your... by wakawaka28 on Friday January 03, 2025 @01:36AM (#42583137)
I don't trust takeout features completely, honestly. Takeout only gives you YOUR data and not all your acquaintances' data, which can be assembled by companies you don't even know exist to profile YOU. The companies you deal with then have no obligation to share it with you, because to them they are only leasing access to data that they sold off or some crap. It's like how the government can't collect this data but they can buy it. The same trick is everywhere.

I seriously don't trust anything on a very deep level. Like I said, I've seen too much evidence that these companies are run by snakes that can only be trusted in certain ways. You might not agree, and I'm not prepared to argue all that tonight (I keep hitting the comment rate limit anyway). Just try to remain skeptical both ways if you don't believe we're being spied on, ok?

Re:I still don't think companies serve you ads based on your... by a0123 on Friday January 03, 2025 @09:00AM (#42585711)
I hate corporations as much as the next guy (probably more than the next guy) but the argument that "it wasn't proven they were doing it which proves they were doing it" is probably the worst one you could have come up with tbh.
Re:I still don't think companies serve you ads based on your... by wakawaka28 on Friday January 03, 2025 @10:15AM (#42586326)
That case dragged on for 5 years, and ended up with them paying $95 million anyway. I think if they could have proved that they weren't doing it, they would have. Maybe I didn't say that clearly but it makes a lot of sense.
Re:I still don't think companies serve you ads based on your... by Breza on Friday January 03, 2025 @02:32PM (#42588721)
Apple spends a lot of money to keep its secrets. Paying $95 million to avoid letting people snoop in exactly how Apple systems work is a bargain, and I don't even think they're using audio for ad targeting.
Re:I still don't think companies serve you ads based on your... by wakawaka28 on Friday January 03, 2025 @02:58PM (#42588932)
Eh I don't think that is what happened here. If other companies want to know how Apple did things 5 years ago, they can just hire some ex-Apple employees. I think someone could build a competitive system with current technology for something in the ballpark of $95 million lol.
Re:I still don't think companies serve you ads based on your... by a0123 on Friday January 03, 2025 @08:59AM (#42585699)
Now you should read the details of Apple's Siri lawsuit.
Re:I still don't think companies serve you ads based on your... by Suppafly on Thursday January 02, 2025 @11:34PM (#42582463)
>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.

Re:I still don't think companies serve you ads based on your... by wakawaka28 on Thursday January 02, 2025 @11:52PM (#42582567)
>No we don't. There isn't any of that. This is flat earthing for technophiles.

I think flat earthers are mostly trolls, just like people who deny this spying is happening. Maybe that's giving them too much credit though.

Re:I still don't think companies serve you ads based on your... by BergAndCo on Friday January 03, 2025 @12:46AM (#42582892)
Except they've been literally boasting they can do it?

https://www.404media.co/heres-the-pitch-deck-for-active-list...

Re:I still don't think companies serve you ads based on your... by Suppafly on Friday January 03, 2025 @01:02AM (#42582965)
That doesn't say what you think it does.
Re:I still don't think companies serve you ads based on your... by brookst on Friday January 03, 2025 @09:25AM (#42585894)
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.

Re:I still don't think companies serve you ads based on your... by wakawaka28 on Friday January 03, 2025 @10:24AM (#42586406)
>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.

Re:I still don't think companies serve you ads based on your... by Breza on Friday January 03, 2025 @02:33PM (#42588731)
I spent a long time running an adtech program. The biggest secret is how basic most advertising systems really are.
Re:I still don't think companies serve you ads based on your... by wakawaka28 on Friday January 03, 2025 @02:53PM (#42588896)
Just because most adtech is the equivalent of Internet billboards on the side of the highway doesn't mean these systems aren't in place. You don't even need a very complex system when the entire device platform is designed to spy on you.

Take a look at this for example: https://www.theverge.com/23293687/amazon-irobot-acquisition-...

Even simple ad systems are a huge privacy threat. Add to that audio, location, and even AI screen reading surveillance, and you're screwed.

Re:I still don't think companies serve you ads based on your... by Breza on Monday January 06, 2025 @02:50AM (#42608605)
Both things can be true. Companies vacuum up massive amounts of personal data. And then they run it through crummy algorithms that are designed to increase the number of people who fit into a given category instead of accurately finding only the people who really ought to be in that category.
Re:I still don't think companies serve you ads based on your... by monkeyfun on Friday January 03, 2025 @02:38PM (#42588770)
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.

Re:I still don't think companies serve you ads based on your... by nickburns on Saturday January 04, 2025 @04:48PM (#42597933)
The traffic would obviously be encrypted. Obviously.
Re:I still don't think companies serve you ads based on your... by simonw on Saturday January 04, 2025 @07:39PM (#42598742)
So modify the application binary to swap out the certificate in order to spy on the traffic. Difficult, but not impossible.
Re:I still don't think companies serve you ads based on your... by nickburns on Tuesday January 07, 2025 @04:16PM (#42627584)
[delayed]