One of my weirder hobbies is trying to convince people that the idea that companies are listening to you through your phone’s microphone and serving you targeted ads is a conspiracy theory that isn’t true.

ARS said, that reuters said, that users said.

Someone needs a new hobby. "Proof" from 3 layers of journalists interpreting a case that they themself said never went to court. Trying to use evidence of absence as proof will never win any hearts in a debate.

I didn't seriously believe it happened either for quite some time because confirmation bias is a bitch. But I've seen it happen a few times where it would have to be a seriously unlikely coincidence.

If it was searched for in Google, Facebook, apple, or whatever sure

If it was correlated with locality and time, sure.

You can infer a lot from a few searches but there are times where nothing was searched for and a novel concept came out of conversation and book there's ads and search completion for it.

Maybe, just maybe, someone settling a lawsuit without being found guilty, doesn't ACTUALLY mean they're innocent.

I think we will need a few more lawsuits such as Apple has agreed to pay $95 million to settle a lawsuit alleging that its virtual assistant, Siri, recorded users' conversations without their consent before this is no longer treated as confirmation bias or people been paranoid.

My wife used to tell me that her adds would change after discussing something and at first I did not believe her, but it just kept happening again, and again. It reached the point that we would put our phones away, discuss something and there is no change in ads about the topic. If we had our phones near adds would change.This would happen on things that we would not see adds for normally. For example we would discuss a trip to a place we have never been and she would start seeing adds about the destination after that.

I'm always torn on this topic because, yeah there's hundreds of biases that can be attributed to this phenominon.

IE something becomes a popular topic in your area. Meaning more people in the area start searching the topic in that area, thus advertisers start pushing it to that location.

Obviously ads are also tracking you in 100 ways on what you've searched for, looked at etc... which means it could have a good guess of what you are going to talk about, before you do.

But at the same time, I think everyone can think of a lot of stories of things that just seemed to perfect, to out of the blue. For me the big one was 10 years ago when I walked into an attic, said "man it's fucking dark up here", opened my phone, and a big ad for a flashlight app popped up.

On Android, I have the mic, location, and camera blocked via the pulldown tiles menu. I turn them on when needed. The OS and some apps like to bitch about this sometimes but it seems to be working ok.

My iphone does not offer these blanket blocking options. It's a work phone, so I just leave it off unless I need it.

It's well possible and previously tv mic had been used as bugging device. The problem is, way too many security researchers look in system level software of iOS and even other components of the device that such practice will be too risky for apple (same applies for mainstream android products). Also processing realtime audio, finding potentially unrealiable topic from it and doing realtime ad is actually too much work as of today's tech (might change sooner than you think though).

What, I think, is more practical is to use the whole query after the wake word to show ad, and potentially use other app tracking data, which is way much reliable than voice for targeting purpose. Voice data is useful for bugging purpose, primarily (ab)used by nation states and LE.

I bet in the medical procedure case mentioned in the blog the user searched/talked about that in other apps and average people aren't good to notice these privacy leaks.

This is a great case of confirmation bias, too. The one time your ad happens to match a conversation you had earlier, you’ll be convinced forever, and tell everyone you know about it. The ten million other times you have a conversation that doesn’t appear in your ads will go unnoticed.

I'm not saying it's completely 100% not possible and has never happened in the history of human technology, but the situation is not as ubiquitous as most people seem to think it is.

Don't get me wrong, collecting and inferring personal information is happening on an epic and ubiquitous scale these days, but for the most part, it's not the microphones on your devices that are doing the data collection.

Pretty much all my older relatives are completely convinced their phones are listening to their day to day conversations and serving up ads based on those conversations. One of them came to visit me for a week over the summer. One night we had been talking about having asparagus for dinner, and as evidence that their phone was listening to us, the next day they showed me that their news feed was filled with asparagus recipes. Another night, we were talking about one of their medical conditions and the drugs they were taking, and the next day they showed me that they got notifications about a prescription drug for that condition. On another day, we had been talking about a specific actor's filmography and all their movies that we liked, the next day their streaming video app was suggesting a bunch of content from that actor.

I can understand why this seemed pretty convincing that our phones were listening to us, but consider the simpler explanation.

I live in a rural area where there's not good cellular reception, so for the most part, our phones are connected via wifi to the same internet connection. Essentially, every device on the property has the same external IP address. So, when I looked up asparagus recipes on my laptop later that night because I wanted to surprise my relative with that specific dish, and when I Googled the prescription medication the relative was taking to see what the side effects where, and when I looked up that actor on IMBD to see what all movies they'd been in, that pretty much gave all the advertisers all the information they needed to start targeting ads and recommendations to folks sharing the same IP address.

Occam's Razor being what it is, I assume that's how things went down versus all our conversations being constantly recorded and uploaded to the net to be interpreted and used for the purposes of serving ads.

I don't think that most of the big tech companies are listening to your microphone (I'm not ruling it out entirely, and I'm certainly there are some smaller sketchier companies that are doing it)

But I think most of the time most of the time they don't need to

They know what ads you've seen on your phone/computer, what you've been googling, the websites you've visited, where you've used your credit card, what shows and movies you watch, and where you've been (from gps locations, or from what wifi networks and Bluetooth devices you've been near or connected to) and what ads, playlists, stores, products, etc. you were exposed to while you were there, and of course who you talk to and all of that same information about those people.

That's all going to influence the things you think and talk about, they probably have a pretty good idea what kind of conversations you're going to have well before you do.

And don't get me wrong, that's creepy as fuck.

I think most of it comes down to people not even realizing how much data about ourselves we put out there and all of the ways it can be collected and used to build a profile about you.

And honestly I think they can probably get better data from that most of the time than from trying to filter out background noise and make sense of what you're talking about through your microphone.

People always talk about getting served ads after they talk about something. I think it's the other way around. The ads put the thought into your brain and then you start talking about it and notice after you've already been thinking about it for a while.