Not necessarily easily, but nothing is completely foolproof. The best way to completely prevent the microphones wired into your house from being hacked is to not have them there in the first place.
My basic reactions to such things go through three phases.The first being desire for the internet of things based on it being a a neat idea, the second being paranoia about the risks inherent in instituting such a thing into your life, and the third being the realization they aren’t actually useful enough for it to matter.
I don’t disagree, but I can’t really deny that I have a sort of whimsical interest in the concept of a smart home anyways. That sums up my reaction to a lot of relatively minimal use technology though.
Man, i needed that laugh. I know you’re young, but you have NO IDEA just how much personal info you give them. Every single time you use “ok google” or alexa, whatever, those questions are stored, as sound. In fact, you can go listen to yourself having text to speech conversations, and even delete your copy. But not theirs. If your location is on, they literally map your life. Where you go, how long you stay there. Literally your entire life is an ad campaign profile.
@Havocbyte
I just…I cannot even fathom how you could trust them, when they do the exact same thing as microsoft, apple, sony, samsung, etc. It defies logic.
That’s just from the one optout site. 104 trackers. Over THREE HUNDRED ads. They want to know what you opt out of, so they can get the data some other way.
You really have to have a little healthy cynicism and distrust here. Because Google provides so much stuff for free, they have to make money some other way. The way they do that is collect as much information about you as possible, so that they can target advertisements better in the hopes of getting more clicks and therefore making more money.
Well put. The problem isn’t Google itself, but that the profit in this industry is derived from the acquisition and use of personal information.
I’ll also reiterate one other issue with this - namely that the mere existence of a connected recording capability, whether audio or video, is a security risk in and of itself regardless of who made the device or what its purpose is.