• mox@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    113
    arrow-down
    20
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

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

    Meanwhile:

    • Billiam@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      182
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      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.

      • mox@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        29
        arrow-down
        62
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        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.

        • conciselyverbose@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          44
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          2 months ago

          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.

          • mox@lemmy.sdf.org
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            18
            ·
            edit-2
            2 months ago

            Pretty sure that qualifies for that permission.

            I don’t know what you mean. Existing behavior does not provide the control or visibility that I described.

            One important difference is that the “permissions” in the screen shot are effectively all-or-nothing: if you don’t agree to all of them, then you don’t get to install the app. They’re not permissions so much as demands.

            (Some OS do have settings that will let you turn them off individually after installation, but this is not universally available, is often buried in an advanced configuration panel, leaves a window of time where they are still allowed, and in some cases have been known to cause apps to crash. Things are improving on this front with new OS versions, but doing so in microscopic steps that move at a glacial pace.)

            • conciselyverbose@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              22
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              2 months ago

              If your app touches the camera and mic, it will show up on that screen that it does so. “Using the API” (which is just how the OS works) doesn’t prevent it from appearing on that screen, especially when you’re doing so for the purpose of putting video and audio in posts.

              • mox@lemmy.sdf.org
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                7
                arrow-down
                9
                ·
                edit-2
                2 months ago

                If your app touches the camera and mic, it will show up on that screen that it does so.

                Showing up on that screen is no substitute for what is actually needed:

                • Individual control (an easy and obvious way to allow or deny each thing separately)
                • Minimal access (a way to create a sound file without giving Facebook access to an open mic)
                • Visibility (a clear indication by the OS when Facebook is capturing or has captured data)
                • Farid@startrek.website
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  8
                  ·
                  2 months ago

                  All of those things are implemented in modern Android. Well, almost.

                  • Whenever the app wants to use microphone an OS popup asks you if you want to give the app permission to use the feature. The options are “when using app”, “only this time” (it will give the app one-time-use access to the mic) and “never”. If you click the 1st or 3rd options, you wouldn’t see the popup again and you’ll have to change the permission from settings. If you choose the 2nd option, you can manually choose to give permission each time it’s requested.
                  • This is impossible? The OS can either let the app use the mic or not, it can’t tell what the app is doing with the mic. Unless you mean give a one-time permission this time, but not in the future, then we covered that in previous point.
                  • Android always shows a green indicator on screen (upper right corner) when any app is using the microphone or camera API. Well, almost always, some system apps might not trigger it. But if you want to see which app is using mic/camera you can tap the indicator.
          • Imgonnatrythis@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            22
            ·
            edit-2
            2 months ago

            I think this is more a teleological argument he is making and I agree. We’ve become numb to these permission warnings. Oh this app needs access to my camera because I need to take a photo of something once at registration. Why can’t it link to my default trusted photo app and that app can send a one time transfer to it? I hardly question these permissions anymore since many apps need permissions for rare one off functions. The only thing I deny every single time is my contact list.

      • ChapulinColorado@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        2 months ago

        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>

      • mox@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        20
        arrow-down
        15
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        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.

        • Evilcoleslaw@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          20
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          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.

  • werefreeatlast@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    54
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    2 months ago

    Dildos, lots of dildos! I’m just gonna repeat that while I’m driving to see if I start getting Google ads for dildos.

  • yamanii@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    2 months ago

    At this point it doesn’t even matter if it’s real or not, after Snowden no sane person believes big tech since they were all in on PRISM.

  • Suavevillain@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    34
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    This is why I don’t like the push of everything needing an app. I sure do wish people in congress cared about this type of privacy issues the way they did Tiktok.

  • Tygr@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    Turn off microphone access to all social media and tell your friends the same. I’ve disabled mine for years and all ads are generic or from prior sites visited.

    • bluewing@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      Do you one better - My mini-desktop is plugged into a monitor with no microphone or camera.

  • FlavoredButtHair@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    This is why I don’t have the Facebook app installed. However, what about messenger? Did the collect the data from messenger?

  • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    54
    ·
    2 months ago

    They really need to name-and-shame beyond “Facebook Partner” considering we’re talking about fucking Cox Media Group.

  • oweka@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    For everyone saying apps need permission to use your mic I want to point you to “play services”. The permissions protections only apply to user space apps not system apps. Thats how u can say “OK google” and get the chat ai to pop up even tho its “not listening” according to the OS.

    Also if you read the website they are not piping audio to their servers. They push triggers (keywords, etc) to the local ai on your phone that listens for things like “OK google” and then sends those reports back.

    Meta apps would need permission to to mic but I think if y’all check your big tech apps u will be surprised how many have that permission.

    I can’t speak to iOS because its closed source but it probably has similar backdoors for apple.

    • Valmond@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      2 months ago

      Yeah that’s a shame, electronics seems to have reached a level where most people just don’t need or dream of a better something (PC, phone, etc) and other tech is hard to grasp like biotech.

    • Agent641@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      The future is going to be amazing! Well, it has the potential to be amazing if we use tech the right way. No I mean, like in an ethical way. Without exploiting people. No not like that, in a way that helps people. Well yes, billionaires are people, but I meant… at least it should be in legal ways. Or at least policed. Not hostile to average people. Not an openly criminal endeavour. Maybe just dont criminalise resistance to it? … oh, actually the future is going to be a techno-monopolistic dark age, I see. We can pivot to covering that.

  • AgentGrimstone@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    24
    arrow-down
    9
    ·
    2 months ago

    There were whole threads of people saying this stuff doesn’t happen. They would say it just didn’t make sense that companies would do this, it’s not worth it to them. That all the ads I was seeing at convenient times were just a coincidence.

    • PrimeMinisterKeyes@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      2 months ago

      The next iteration of gaslighting is already here: That it’s no big deal anyway since you can just use an ad blocker. Riiight, let’s all just turn our eyes away to make the monster go away. Surely, it’ll get bored and stop listening and recording, and surely, it will not sell its collected data off to banks, insurance providers, the government, law enforcement… right?

      • prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 months ago

        Seriously… If ad-blockers worked at a high enough level to actually impact this shit, then they wouldn’t be doing it. They know most people don’t bother with ad blockers, and because of that, they’re low-hanging fruit.

    • dev_null@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      2 months ago

      And they are right. This company is full of shit. Show me any proof the tech from the deleted advert actually existed.

    • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      2 months ago

      Right and your evidence is “I think it happens”.

      Show me the stack trace.

    • prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      2 months ago

      They’re here in this thread lol. No matter what, these people will deny its happening. I don’t understand it.

    • DragonTypeWyvern@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      There are simps in this thread trying to say “uuuuhmmmm AKSHUALLY it’s not Facebook directly” like that’s fucking relevant to the problem.

    • vxx@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      I have my camera and microphone deactivated on the OS level because Youtube and Spotify would show me things workmates mentioned way too often.

      I didn’t notice it since.

      Could still be a major coincidence though, the biggest of them.

      • prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        2 months ago

        Same exact thing for me, and same exact results. Also too major of a coincidence in my mind.

  • ZILtoid1991@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    goes close to a smartphone “BLOODY MARY! BLOODY MARY! BLOODY MARY!” gets advertisements from local pubs and restaurants serving Bloody Mary at a discount

      • ripripripriprip@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        2 months ago

        Anecdotally, it’s not even a solution. I’ve run into “coincidental” ads without having the FB app installed (visiting FB via browser).

        • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          Then they’ve installed a root kit on your computer because that’s the only way they could have access to your microphone, the web browser blocks it otherwise.

    • dan@upvote.au
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      2 months ago

      Except it’s not Facebook doing this, it’s Cox Media Group.

      • grubbyweasel@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        2 months ago

        If you look at the slideshow, cox media group doesn’t claim to be the ones harvesting the data, only to be processing it using AI to then provide that aggregate information to advertisers. Which makes sense, they literally have no means to directly collect voice data from you

        Also no offense but, I thought lemmy users were a little bit better than this whole “read headline, make assumptions, storm to comments” thing that Reddit loves to do

        • dan@upvote.au
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          they literally have no means to directly collect voice data from you

          The Facebook app doesn’t collect voice data either though, or at least I haven’t seen any actual data proving it. Some Android phones show a dot on the screen when the microphone is in use. The Facebook app doesn’t even ask for microphone permission unless you use a feature that needs it.