Apple, compensation for Siri error: It heard active and intimate messages
Apple was always synonymous with innovation, with its devices and services that revolutionized consumer technology. In, SiriVocal Assistant, integrated into Apple devices, is one of the most commonly used tools, a real digital companion that facilitates users’ daily life.
For the first time launched in the 21st, Serie Voice Commands were designed to run online search, set up reminders, transmit messages and more. His skills to “listen” and react in real time have led to more skill in interaction with Apple devices.
However, there is a question behind this apparent ease that has raised a lot of controversy and privacy anxiety: vowel assistant Siri May The user registered personal conversation without being aware of itThe This is the heart of a legal subject that leads Apple to the need Give compensation to the users involvedOpening a new chapter about conducting vocal data and respect for privacy.
Vocal recording analysis: Siri’s unexpected activation
The problem that gave birth to Class Action against Apple returned to a report published in 2019 GuardianThe According to what was raised, Apple collected a sample of vocal recording, about 1% daily interaction, analyzed to analyze by external contractors SiriThe
Although the initial intent was to adapt the Voice Assistant to the Voice Assistant, it was derived that some recording of questioned by voice command was not activated “Hey”, Rather than Accidental activationThe
In practice, the vocal command to the Siri user began to record a personal conversation without waiting. These activation errors are associated with the collection of possible sensitive conversations, which include personal, intimate or simply confidential information, creating a huge alarm among the users.
The story caused a strong reaction, due to the transparency of transparency by Apple, who initially did not inform his users exactly how vocal data was processed. After the report was released, the Apple prevents the program Recording In 2019, however, the loss of his reputation has already been done.
Maxi compensation and conditions for users
After this relationship, Apple has decided to reach an agreement to compensate the users involved, supplies a $ 95 million fundsThe Although the individual is not more than $ 20 for each user, to involve a large number of people involved in contract targets, that is, with those who have purchased consistent devices Siri Between 17 September 2014 and 31 December 2024.
In order to get a refund, users have to declare under oath that Siri has been actually activated at one time Personal conversationCreating a certain level of complexity in the refund method. There Class actionIn fact, it supplies that customers have proven that they have been damaged by the voluntary activation of the vowel assistant, which may not be so easy for everyone to display.
The California court, which is overseeing the case, will specify the agreement on February 7, 2021, which will be defined on the date on which the return process will be defined.
Not just Apple: Also Google and Amazon, Effects of Privacy
The story raises many extensive concerns about the transparency of the corporate practice in the subject of personal data and the subject ConfidentialityThe Apple does not just have to face these topics: Google E Amazon They had to face similar disputes with their vocal assistants respectively Google Assistant E AlexaThe
In both cases, the data collected including accidental was subject to negotiations, also involved in consent with GDPR European, which guarantees personal data protection.
The problem raised by various vocal assistants expressed concern over the amount of sensitive information that users are often aware of the treatment that happened under the screen. It is clear that vocal technologies are extremely useful, of course, must deal with its limits Digital privacy And with the need for transparency in data management.
In the case of the growing attached and in the digital world, in the case of Siri The reflection of how much we can trust the devices that use voice to contact us. Now the question: What will this story take to us in the future? How many more privacy risks are hidden in the functioning of other vocal assistants? And how do technical companies respond to growing requests for transparency and data protection? The answer to this question can determine the users’ trust in tomorrow’s technology.
