I changed the title from “Spying” to “Eavesdropping” because the article actually directly supports that it is “spying” on you, just not listening.
I changed the title from “Spying” to “Eavesdropping” because the article actually directly supports that it is “spying” on you, just not listening.
So this article is suspect. It says that we’re not being recorded so some distance advertiser can run ads, yet Alphonso was caught doing just that.
Do better “journalists”
Alphonso is listening for TV sound signatures, which while definitely intrusive and privacy invading, is not the same as 24/7 listening for voice-to-text-to-ad purposes.
They would only need to listen for a second or so to determine what channel you are on, instead of all the time, so there is a massive difference in scope.
They are effectively shazaming your TV.
Still creepy and invasive, but not 24/7 recording invasive.
Unless you are aware of further developments than I am, Alphonso required permissions and provided a consent dialog so it could not be considered spying or eavesdropping.