I think I could tell it was real because I saw real flood damage in New Orleans after hurricane Katrina. You can almost see the motion of the water in those cars
@Michel Patrice The thing is if you actually take the time to look at the statistics, FLOODS and FIRES and HURRICAINES are neither happening more often NOR with more severity, they are actually down somewhat. What IS happening is more capital damage but this is only because stupid people build condos on the shorelines.
[(Forewarned; Excuse the tone and style of this comment... I have just watched some Stewart Lee.)]
"The short answer is no, probably not!"
Not what Edward Snowden said.
Not what serves the corporation, the advertisers, nor the snoops.
How hard, or how easy, is it, to script even a simple voice to text logger, and filter a trigger word list, to keep the resources down... even before an age of llm... then with the triangulatability intrinsic to the technology, and the various motion sensors etc that they have these days... they can do much more than just cold-read you and zap you with epi-acoustic manipulations... ?
Easy, right?
How hard, or easy, is it, to write a script that hides such features upon any suspicion of being detected?
Easy right?
How hard, or easy, is it, to defy the statutes mandating maximising wealth extraction in the service of your share holders, to disobey your boss telling you to build such things, after you've already been selected for such a role because you're indifferent and even eager to do such things, knowing that were you to so disobey you would lose your salary and suffer the wrath of the corporate legal department?
Hard, right?
How hard, or easy, is it, to avoid installing any of the many spywares advertised as necessary conveniences in your service, when you've no awareness of the dangers of advertising thus nor the prudence to avoid it or to put your guard up if ever exposed, [and with data-mining being completely outside your scope of conception of possibilities, let alone the dangers of it, to you], and so eagerly lap it up as if truth rather than a set of carefully crafted lies to maximally hoodwink the most from you and have you think it was your own idea, that it's just a necessary convenience in your service and so of course you'll install it, right... ...and to have that web-connected voice-activated technology work without listening to you constantly?
Hard, right?
So the answer to “Is My Phone Listening To Me?”, is perhaps not so much the "short" answer, as the "dangerously stupid" answer.
That article reads like:
wrong answer [to mislead the ignorant who wont read on]
boasting
wrong answer [reaffirmed, with...
nonsequitor argument affirming opposite.]
~watch video~ semantic nonsequitor.
offer of services to prevent what the article said (from the start and throughout) wasn't happening [despite indicating that it evidently has to be happening].
Well, i'm glad there's clear messaging going out there to help people with their electronic freedom.
Is this to dodge some algorithmic censorship or something?
Not to worry, the right answer is buried in there.
