tag:theconversation.com,2011:/ca/topics/digital-assistants-34380/articlesDigital assistants – The Conversation2023-07-20T12:31:21Ztag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2092832023-07-20T12:31:21Z2023-07-20T12:31:21ZCan you trust AI? Here’s why you shouldn’t<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/538131/original/file-20230718-29-tmku.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=0%2C0%2C5040%2C3357&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">AI chatbots are becoming more powerful, but how do you know if they're working in your best interest?</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/photo/artificial-intelligence-chatbot-concept-royalty-free-image/1364050120">Carol Yepes/Moment via Getty Images</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>If you ask Alexa, Amazon’s voice assistant AI system, whether Amazon is a monopoly, it responds by <a href="https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-06-14/amazon-s-alexa-defends-company-honor-while-jabbing-rivals">saying it doesn’t know</a>. It doesn’t take much to make it <a href="https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-06-14/amazon-s-alexa-defends-company-honor-while-jabbing-rivals">lambaste the other tech giants</a>, but it’s silent about its own corporate parent’s misdeeds.</p>
<p>When Alexa responds in this way, it’s obvious that it is putting its developer’s interests ahead of yours. Usually, though, it’s not so obvious whom an AI system is serving. To avoid being exploited by these systems, people will need to learn to approach AI skeptically. That means deliberately constructing the input you give it and thinking critically about its output.</p>
<p>Newer generations of AI models, with their more sophisticated and less rote responses, are making it harder to tell who benefits when they speak. Internet companies’ manipulating what you see to serve their own interests is nothing new. Google’s search results and your Facebook feed are <a href="https://www.marketingweek.com/ritson-digital-duopoly-2018/">filled with paid entries</a>. <a href="https://www.sciencefriday.com/articles/chaos-machine-book-excerpt/">Facebook</a>, <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2021/12/05/business/media/tiktok-algorithm.html">TikTok</a> and others manipulate your feeds to maximize the time you spend on the platform, which means more ad views, over your well-being.</p>
<p>What distinguishes AI systems from these other internet services is how interactive they are, and how these interactions will increasingly become like relationships. It doesn’t take much extrapolation from today’s technologies to envision AIs that will plan trips for you, negotiate on your behalf or act as therapists and life coaches. </p>
<p>They are likely to be with you 24/7, know you intimately, and be able to anticipate your needs. This kind of conversational interface to the vast network of services and resources on the web is within the capabilities of existing generative AIs like ChatGPT. They are on track to become <a href="https://danielmiessler.com/p/ais-next-big-thing-is-digital-assistants/">personalized digital assistants</a>.</p>
<p>As a <a href="https://dblp.org/pid/s/BruceSchneier.html">security expert</a> and <a href="https://cyber.harvard.edu/people/nathan-sanders">data scientist</a>, we believe that people who come to rely on these AIs will have to trust them implicitly to navigate daily life. That means they will need to be sure the AIs aren’t secretly working for someone else. Across the internet, devices and services that seem to work for you already secretly work against you. Smart TVs <a href="https://www.consumerreports.org/electronics/privacy/how-to-turn-off-smart-tv-snooping-features-a4840102036/">spy on you</a>. Phone apps <a href="https://www.usenix.org/conference/pepr20/presentation/egelman">collect and sell your data</a>. Many apps and websites <a href="https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2022/09/ftc-report-shows-rise-sophisticated-dark-patterns-designed-trick-trap-consumers">manipulate you through dark patterns</a>, design elements that <a href="https://theconversation.com/what-are-dark-patterns-an-online-media-expert-explains-165362">deliberately mislead, coerce or deceive website visitors</a>. This is <a href="https://www.schneier.com/books/data-and-goliath/">surveillance capitalism</a>, and AI is shaping up to be part of it.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/5AvtUrHxg8A?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">AI is playing a role in surveillance capitalism, which boils down to spying on you to make money off you.</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>In the dark</h2>
<p>Quite possibly, it could be much worse with AI. For that AI digital assistant to be truly useful, it will have to really know you. Better than your phone knows you. Better than Google search knows you. Better, perhaps, than your close friends, intimate partners and therapist know you.</p>
<p>You have no reason to trust today’s leading generative AI tools. Leave aside the <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2023/05/01/business/ai-chatbots-hallucination.html">hallucinations</a>, the made-up “facts” that GPT and other large language models produce. We expect those will be largely cleaned up as the technology improves over the next few years. </p>
<p>But you don’t know how the AIs are configured: how they’ve been trained, what information they’ve been given, and what instructions they’ve been commanded to follow. For example, researchers <a href="https://www.theverge.com/23599441/microsoft-bing-ai-sydney-secret-rules">uncovered the secret rules</a> that govern the Microsoft Bing chatbot’s behavior. They’re largely benign but can change at any time.</p>
<h2>Making money</h2>
<p>Many of these AIs are created and trained at enormous expense by some of the largest tech monopolies. They’re being offered to people to use free of charge, or at very low cost. These companies will need to monetize them somehow. And, as with the rest of the internet, that somehow is likely to include surveillance and manipulation.</p>
<p>Imagine asking your chatbot to plan your next vacation. Did it choose a particular airline or hotel chain or restaurant because it was the best for you or because its maker got a kickback from the businesses? As with paid results in Google search, newsfeed ads on Facebook and paid placements on Amazon queries, these paid influences are likely to get more surreptitious over time.</p>
<p>If you’re asking your chatbot for political information, are the results skewed by the politics of the corporation that owns the chatbot? Or the candidate who paid it the most money? Or even the views of the demographic of the people whose data was used in training the model? Is your AI agent secretly a double agent? Right now, there is no way to know.</p>
<h2>Trustworthy by law</h2>
<p>We believe that people should expect more from the technology and that tech companies and AIs can become more trustworthy. The European Union’s proposed <a href="https://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/press-room/20230505IPR84904/ai-act-a-step-closer-to-the-first-rules-on-artificial-intelligence">AI Act</a> takes some important steps, requiring transparency about the data used to train AI models, mitigation for potential bias, disclosure of foreseeable risks and reporting on industry standard tests.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/kcOQYj9zcqw?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">The European Union is pushing ahead with AI regulation.</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Most existing AIs <a href="https://crfm.stanford.edu/2023/06/15/eu-ai-act.html">fail to comply</a> with this emerging European mandate, and, despite <a href="https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/schumer-call-hands-deck-approach-regulating-ai-rcna90193">recent prodding</a> from Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, the U.S. is far behind on such regulation.</p>
<p>The AIs of the future should be trustworthy. Unless and until the government delivers robust consumer protections for AI products, people will be on their own to guess at the potential risks and biases of AI, and to mitigate their worst effects on people’s experiences with them. </p>
<p>So when you get a travel recommendation or political information from an AI tool, approach it with the same skeptical eye you would a billboard ad or a campaign volunteer. For all its technological wizardry, the AI tool may be little more than the same.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/209283/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Nathan Sanders is a volunteer contributor to the Massachusetts Platform for Legislative Engagement (MAPLE) project.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Bruce Schneier does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>It’s difficult to see how artificial intelligence systems work, and to see whose interests they work for. Regulation could make AI more trustworthy. Until then, user beware.Bruce Schneier, Adjunct Lecturer in Public Policy, Harvard Kennedy SchoolNathan Sanders, Affiliate, Berkman Klein Center for Internet & Society, Harvard UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1973502023-01-12T05:54:09Z2023-01-12T05:54:09Z2022 wasn’t the year of Cleopatra – so why was she the most viewed page on Wikipedia?<p>At the end of every year, I gather statistics on the most viewed Wikipedia articles of the year. This helps me, a computational social scientist, understand what topics captured the most attention and gives me a chance to reflect on the major public events of the year. I try to use data to determine how the public (and more specifically here, English-language Wikipedia readers) will collectively remember the past year.</p>
<p>In 2020, the COVID-19 pandemic, US presidential election, and Kobe Bryant’s death were among the most memorable events. According to Wikipedia readers, 2021 will be remembered for Netflix’s Squid Game, the men’s European Football Championship and the death of Prince Philip.</p>
<p>But in 2022, <a href="https://tahayasseri.files.wordpress.com/2023/01/wikipedia_100_most_viewed_articles_2022.pdf">the list is topped</a> by a somewhat unexpected name – Cleopatra.</p>
<p>Most articles at the top of the list are related to major world events, including the Russian invasion of Ukraine, the death of the Queen and the men’s football World Cup. Elon Musk and Johnny Depp also made the list. In addition to perennial favourites such as the Bible and YouTube, there are a couple of surprises that were probably influenced by external factors like media and popular culture.</p>
<p>For example, the article about Jeffrey Dahmer, the notorious US serial killer who died in 1994, had more than 54 million views, coming in at number two. While aggregate page view statistics alone may not provide a complete understanding of why Wikipedia users were interested in certain topics, changes in view statistics over time can provide clues. </p>
<p>In the case of Dahmer, an increase in page traffic corresponds with the release of the Netflix series <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dahmer_%E2%80%93_Monster:_The_Jeffrey_Dahmer_Story">Monster: The Jeffrey Dahmer Story</a> on September 21. This suggests that the series may have prompted readers to learn more about Dahmer from Wikipedia.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="Two graphs side by side, showing that the Jeffrey Dahmer article had a spike of views in September 2022, while the Cleopatra article had high readership all year with a spike in October." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/503410/original/file-20230106-10448-mc22tn.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/503410/original/file-20230106-10448-mc22tn.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=318&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/503410/original/file-20230106-10448-mc22tn.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=318&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/503410/original/file-20230106-10448-mc22tn.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=318&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/503410/original/file-20230106-10448-mc22tn.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/503410/original/file-20230106-10448-mc22tn.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/503410/original/file-20230106-10448-mc22tn.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Daily page view counts of Jeffrey Dahmer and Cleopatra articles in English Wikipedia for 2022.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="license">Author provided</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>However, the massive interest in the article about Cleopatra remains a mystery. While there were some news stories about <a href="https://www.liveforfilm.com/2022/11/24/is-the-cleopatra-remake-finally-going-ahead/">a remake of the classic movie</a> and <a href="https://www.sportingnews.com/us/nfl/news/caesars-sportsbook-super-bowl-commercial-caesar-cleopatra-mannings/f0bq0ts1vunuh8swstjl0hlz">a Superbowl commercial featuring Cleopatra</a>, these do not fully explain the significant number of views. The day-to-day viewership statistics of the Cleopatra article also do not point to any specific event as the cause.</p>
<p>It also doesn’t show the typical rapid decay pattern of public attention. My colleagues and I have found <a href="https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/full/10.1098/rsos.160460">in our past work</a> that online attention usually has a short half-life of five to eight days, similar to what we see in the case of the Dahmer page.</p>
<h2>Hey Google, tell me about Cleopatra</h2>
<p>Trying to find the reason for the sudden spike in views of the Cleopatra article, I turned to the internet for answers. Soon, someone on Twitter <a href="https://twitter.com/Pyb75/status/1606373228682874890?s=20&t=g0sF2TepIamVK-1Y_vQaFw">provided a clue</a>: the Google Assistant app, which uses voice recognition to allow users to interact with their phones through conversation, may be responsible.</p>
<p>Launched in 2016, the app is now built into at least 1 billion devices and has <a href="https://blog.google/products/assistant/heres-how-google-assistant-became-more-helpful-2018/">more than 500 million monthly users</a>. When you install the app and start using it, it provides examples of the types of requests you can make. </p>
<p>These include commands for your phone’s operating system, such as “Open YouTube,” or requests to initiate a web search, such as “How many ounces in a cup?” The app can also perform a combination of actions, such as “Show Cristiano Ronaldo on Instagram,” which would open the Instagram app and bring up Ronaldo’s profile.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="Six screenshots of Google Assistant suggestions." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/503396/original/file-20230106-10576-k7ud43.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/503396/original/file-20230106-10576-k7ud43.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=329&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/503396/original/file-20230106-10576-k7ud43.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=329&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/503396/original/file-20230106-10576-k7ud43.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=329&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/503396/original/file-20230106-10576-k7ud43.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=413&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/503396/original/file-20230106-10576-k7ud43.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=413&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/503396/original/file-20230106-10576-k7ud43.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=413&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Examples of the Google Assistant’s command suggestions.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="license">Author provided</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>One of the prompts the app provides to demonstrate its capabilities is “Try saying: Show Cleopatra on Wikipedia”. Sure enough, in 2022, approximately more than 50 million people followed this prompt. Before Google Assistant <a href="https://blog.google/products/assistant/bringing-google-assistant-features-all-smart-devices/">became widespread in 2020</a>, the annual views on Cleopatra were around 2.5 million.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="A screenshot of the relevant Google assistant prompt, overlayed onto a graph showing Cleopatra Wikipedia views since 2016." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/503399/original/file-20230106-25-750vf8.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/503399/original/file-20230106-25-750vf8.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=319&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/503399/original/file-20230106-25-750vf8.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=319&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/503399/original/file-20230106-25-750vf8.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=319&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/503399/original/file-20230106-25-750vf8.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=401&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/503399/original/file-20230106-25-750vf8.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=401&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/503399/original/file-20230106-25-750vf8.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=401&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">The Google Assistant prompt that is probably responsible for growing interest in Cleopatra’s Wikipedia page. Before 2020, the views remained low.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="license">Author provided</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Designing collective attention</h2>
<p>The article’s popularity was probably greatly influenced by a prompt provided by the Google Assistant app, a seemingly arbitrary decision made by Google UX designers.</p>
<p>This is more than just an interesting coincidence. Researchers in the fields of social data science and web analytics often use statistics such as Google search volumes and Wikipedia page views to study attention and popularity dynamics. In addition to <a href="https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0071226">predicting the success of movies</a> at the box office I used such data to <a href="https://epjdatascience.springeropen.com/articles/10.1140/epjds/s13688-016-0083-3">study electoral popularity</a> as well. </p>
<p>While these rather new data sources can be useful and exciting, and great proxies for monitoring human behaviour online, they can lead to misleading analysis. In 2013, Google researchers tried – <a href="https://www.wired.com/2015/10/can-learn-epic-failure-google-flu-trends">and failed</a> – to predict the severity of the flu season by analysing user search data. </p>
<p>It’s important for researchers in computational social science to also consider qualitative methods and in-depth case studies to understand the story behind the data.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="A smiling woman holds her smartphone up to her mouth to speak to a digital assistant" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/503387/original/file-20230106-10516-bqlyvc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/503387/original/file-20230106-10516-bqlyvc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/503387/original/file-20230106-10516-bqlyvc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/503387/original/file-20230106-10516-bqlyvc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/503387/original/file-20230106-10516-bqlyvc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/503387/original/file-20230106-10516-bqlyvc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/503387/original/file-20230106-10516-bqlyvc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">‘Hey Google, show me Cleopatra on Wikipedia.’</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/smiling-african-woman-holding-phone-speak-1444225898">fizkes / Shutterstock</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>More importantly, the Cleopatra example highlights the impact that seemingly small decisions by designers can have on directing collective attention to certain topics and issues, sometimes with more serious consequences. Google <a href="https://www.wsj.com/articles/how-google-interferes-with-its-search-algorithms-and-changes-your-results-11573823753">has been criticised</a> for ranking search results in a way that prioritises its own products. </p>
<p>My previous research has shown how links on Wikipedia can <a href="https://www.science.org/doi/full/10.1126/sciadv.1602368">drive significant traffic</a> to certain articles, and how promoting certain petitions on the front page of a petitioning website can significantly <a href="https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0196068">alter the distribution of signatures</a> and therefore chances of receiving widespread attention for certain political causes.</p>
<p>This phenomenon shows how a small change or design decision can have large-scale effects when it reaches millions of users through digital technology. In this case, no harm was done and maybe we learned a bit more about Cleopatra and her relationship with Julius Caesar. But the significant power that high-tech and media companies have in shaping and influencing public attention should not be overlooked.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/197350/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Taha Yasseri receives funding from the Irish Research Council. </span></em></p>Small design decisions by big tech companies can play a role in directing our attention.Taha Yasseri, Associate Professor, School of Sociology; Geary Fellow, Geary Institute for Public Policy, University College DublinLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1640302021-07-14T17:36:35Z2021-07-14T17:36:35ZApple’s Siri is no longer a woman by default, but is this really a win for feminism?<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/410878/original/file-20210712-23-1bs0c4f.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=5%2C0%2C1911%2C1276&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Changing Siri's gender so the virtual assistant isn't female by default is a significant step.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">(Omid Armin/Unsplash)</span>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">CC BY</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>As of March 31, 2021, when Apple released the iOs 14.5 beta update to its operating system, <a href="https://techcrunch.com/2021/03/31/apple-adds-two-siri-voices/">Siri no longer defaults to a female voice when using American English</a>. Users must now choose between two male and two female voices when enabling the voice assistant. This move could be interpreted as a response to the backlash against the <a href="https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000367416.page=1">gender bias embodied by Siri</a> </p>
<p>But how meaningful is this change really?</p>
<p>Siri has been criticized as embodying several facets of gender bias in artificial intelligence. Digital sociologists Yolande Strengers and Jenny Kennedy argue that Siri, along with other voice assistants such as Amazon Alexa and Google Home, have been developed in order to “<a href="https://mitpress.mit.edu/books/smart-wife">carry out ‘wifework’ — domestic duties that have traditionally fallen on (human) wives</a>.” </p>
<p>Siri was originally only voiced as female and programmed to not only perform “wifely” duties such as checking the weather or setting a morning alarm, but also to respond flirtatiously. The use of sexualized phrases by Siri has been extensively documented by hundreds of YouTube videos with titles such as “<a href="https://youtu.be/ondccJU71uQ">Things You Should NEVER Ask SIRI</a>” (which has more than 18 million views). </p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/kaApHdurrEU?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">AppleInsider reviews Siri’s new voices.</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Dated gender references</h2>
<p>Apple has been criticized as promoting a sexualized and stereotypical image of women that negatively harms gender norms. A 2019 investigation by <em>The Guardian</em> reveals that Apple wrote internal guidelines in 2018 asking developers to have Siri deflect mentions of feminism and other “<a href="https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2019/sep/06/apple-rewrote-siri-to-deflect-questions-about-feminism">sensitive topics</a>.” It’s not clear what the guidelines were for hard-coding flirty comebacks.</p>
<p>The language used by Siri was (and still is) a combination of an already stereotypical language model, including jokes hard coded by developers. A 2016 analysis of popular language models used by software companies noted that <a href="https://papers.nips.cc/paper/2016/file/a486cd07e4ac3d270571622f4f316ec5-Paper.pdf">word associations were highly stereotypical</a>. In the study, terms such as philosopher and captain were gendered male, while the opposite was true for terms such as homemaker. </p>
<p>Legal scholar Céline Castets-Renard and I have been studying language models used by Google Translate and Microsoft Bing that have revealed similar issues. We input gender-neutral phrases in romanized Mandarin into the translation platforms, forcing the translation algorithms to select the gender in English and French. Without exception, the Google algorithm selected male and female pronouns along stereotypical gender lines. The Microsoft algorithm, conversely, exclusively selected male pronouns. </p>
<p>The use of models such as these in Siri’s algorithm might explain why, when you type in any corporate title (chief executive officer, chief financial officer, etc.), <a href="https://mashable.com/article/apple-emoji-predictions-sexist">a male emoji would be proposed</a>. While this has since been addressed — likely due to criticism — in the latest iOS, if Siri is asked to retrieve a photo of a captain or a programmer, the images served up are still a series of men.</p>
<h2>Friendly and flirty</h2>
<p>The idea of the perfectly flirtatious virtual assistant inspired <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ne6p6MfLBxc">Spike Jonze’s 2013 movie <em>Her</em></a>, in which the male protagonist falls in love with his virtual assistant. But it’s hard to imagine how biased language models could cause a virtual assistant to flirt with users. This seems likely to have been intentional. </p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/Ewq5tStHmdk?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">In the 2013 movie ‘Her,’ a divorced couple confront intimacy and virtuality.</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<p>In response to these criticisms, Apple progressively removed some of the more flagrant traits, and apparently hard coded away some of the more offensive responses to user questions. This was done without making too many waves. However, the record of YouTube videos shows Siri becoming progressively less gendered.</p>
<p>One of the last remaining criticisms was that Siri had a female voice, which remained the default even though a <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/aug/12/siri-real-voices-apple-ios-assistant-jon-briggs-susan-bennett-karen-jacobsen">male voice was also provided as an option</a> since its 2011 launch. Now, users must decide for themselves if they want a female or a male voice.</p>
<p>Users don’t know, however, the language model that the virtual assistant is trained on, or whether there are still legacies of flirty Siri left in the code. </p>
<h2>Bias is more than voice-deep</h2>
<p>Companies like Apple have a huge responsibility in shaping societal norms. A 2020 National Public Media report revealed that during the pandemic, <a href="https://www.nationalpublicmedia.com/insights/reports/smart-audio-report/">the number of Americans using virtual assistants increased from 46 to 52 per cent</a>, and this trend will only continue. </p>
<p>What’s more, many people interact with virtual assistants openly in their home, which means that biased AIs frequently interact with children and <a href="https://www.brookings.edu/research/how-ai-bots-and-voice-assistants-reinforce-gender-bias/">can skew their own perception of human gender relations</a>. </p>
<p>Removing the default female voice in Siri is important for feminism in that it reduces the immediate association of Siri with women. On the other hand, there is also the possibility of using a gender-neutral voice, such as <a href="https://www.genderlessvoice.com/">the one released in 2019 by a group led by Copenhagen Pride</a>. </p>
<p>Changing Siri’s voice doesn’t address issues related to biased language models, which don’t need a female voice to be used. It also doesn’t address hiring bias in the company, <a href="https://www.apple.com/diversity/">where women only make up 26 per cent of leadership</a> roles in research and development. </p>
<p>If Apple is going to continue quietly removing gender bias from Siri, there is still quite a bit of work to do. Rather than making small and gradual changes, Apple should take the issue of gender discrimination head on and distinguish itself as a leader. </p>
<p>Allowing large portions of the population to interact with biased AI threatens to reverse recent advances in gender norms. Making Siri and other virtual assistants completely bias-free should therefore be an immediate priority for Apple and the other software giants.</p>
<p><em>Curtis Hendricks, Data Science Consultant, contributed to the authorship of this article.</em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/164030/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Eleonore Fournier-Tombs does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Digital assistants have been defaulted to having female voices because of how developers and coders view women’s labour.Eleonore Fournier-Tombs, Senior Researcher, Data and Technology, Institute in Macau (UNU-Macau), United Nations UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1586662021-04-14T17:04:17Z2021-04-14T17:04:17ZFemale robots are seen as being the most human. Why?<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/395473/original/file-20210416-17-1s42eoj.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=119%2C0%2C1277%2C747&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Why do we perceive female robots as more human than male robots?</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Rafael Matigulin</span>, <span class="license">Author provided</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>With the proliferation of female robots such as <a href="https://www.hansonrobotics.com/sophia/">Sophia</a> and the popularity of female virtual assistants such as Siri (Apple), Alexa (Amazon) and Cortana (Microsoft), artificial intelligence seems to have a gender issue.</p>
<p>This gender imbalance in AI is a pervasive trend that has drawn sharp criticism in the media (even Unesco <a href="https://en.unesco.org/news/new-recommendations-improve-gender-equality-digital-professions-and-eliminate-stereotypes-ai">warned against the dangers of this practice</a>) because it could reinforce stereotypes about women being objects.</p>
<p>But why is femininity injected in artificial intelligent objects? If we want to curb the massive use of female gendering in AI, we need to better understand the deep roots of this phenomenon.</p>
<h2>Making the inhuman more human</h2>
<p>In an <a href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/mar.21480">article</a> published in the journal <em>Psychology & Marketing</em>, we argue that research on what makes people human can provide a new perspective into why feminization is systematically used in AI. We suggest that if women tend to be more objectified in AI than men, it is not just because they are perceived as the perfect assistant, but also because people attribute more humanness to women (versus men) in the first place. </p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/PI8XBKb6DQk?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">Trailer for <em>Ex Machina</em>, a 2015 film starring Domhnall Gleeson and Oscar Isaac.</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Why? Because women are perceived as warmer and more likely to experience emotions than men, female gendering of AI objects contributes to humanizing them. Warmth and experience (but not competence) are indeed seen as fundamental qualities to be a full human but are lacking in machines.</p>
<p>Drawing on theories from dehumanization and objectification, we show across five studies with a total sample of more than 3,000 participants that:</p>
<ul>
<li><p>Women are perceived as more human than men, overall and compared to non-human entities (animals and machines).</p></li>
<li><p>Female bots are endowed with more positive human qualities than male bots, and they are perceived as more human than male bots, compared to both animals and machines.</p></li>
<li><p>The inferred humanness of female bots increases perceived uniqueness of treatment from them in a health context, leading to more favorable attitudes toward AI solutions.</p></li>
</ul>
<p>We used several different measures of perceived humanness, compared to both animals and machines. For example, to measure blatant humanness of female and male bots compared to animals, we used the ascent humanization scale based on the classic <a href="https://sites.wustl.edu/prosper/on-the-origins-of-the-march-of-progress/">“march of progress”</a> illustration. We explicitly asked online respondents to indicate how “evolved” they perceived female or male bots to be, using a continuous progression from ancient apes to modern humans. </p>
<figure class="align-right zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/395215/original/file-20210415-18-u82kwc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/395215/original/file-20210415-18-u82kwc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/395215/original/file-20210415-18-u82kwc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=776&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/395215/original/file-20210415-18-u82kwc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=776&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/395215/original/file-20210415-18-u82kwc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=776&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/395215/original/file-20210415-18-u82kwc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=975&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/395215/original/file-20210415-18-u82kwc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=975&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/395215/original/file-20210415-18-u82kwc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=975&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption"></span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="license">Author provided</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>To measure the blatant perceived humanness of female and male bots compared to machines, we created a scale that measures blatant mechanistic (de)humanization, by picturing man’s evolution from robot to human (instead of ape to human). Of course, we created both a female and a male version of each of these scales.</p>
<p>Other measures captured more subtle and implicit perceptions of humanness, by asking respondents the level of emotions they attributed to male and female bots. Some emotions are said to distinguish humans from machines (for example, “friendly”, “fun-loving”), and other emotions to distinguish humans from animals (i.e., “organized”, “polite”). Finally, we also used an <a href="https://implicit.harvard.edu/implicit/">implicit association test</a> to investigate whether female bots are more likely than male bots to be associated with the concept of “human” rather than “machine”.</p>
<h2>The ghost in the machine</h2>
<p>While we found that women and female robots are perceived as more human on most of the subtle and all the blatant and implicit measures of humanness, we also found that men and male robots are perceived as more human on the negative dimensions of the subtle measures of humanness. Taken together, these results indicate that female robots are not only endowed with more positive human qualities than male robots (benevolent sexism), but that they are also perceived as more human and are expected to be more prone to consider our unique needs in a service context. </p>
<p>These findings may point to a new possible explanation of why female bots are favored over their male counterparts, with people preferring female intelligent machines because such machines are more strongly associated with humanness.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/dJTU48_yghs?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">Trailer for <em>Her</em>, a 2013 film starring Joaquin Phoenix and Scarlett Johansson.</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<p>If femininity is used to humanize non-human entities, this research suggests that treating women like objects in AI may lie precisely in the recognition that they are not. The popular assumption, though, frequently referred to as the dehumanization hypothesis, is that it is necessary to view outgroup members as animals or instruments before objectifying them. In other words, dehumanization would be a prerequisite for objectification to take place, with targets of objectification typically being denied their humanness. Contrary to this dominant view, the transformation of women into objects in AI might occur not because women are perceived as subhumans, but because they are perceived as superhumans in the first place.</p>
<p>This is in line with Martha C. Nussbaum’s assertion: “Objectification entails making into a thing… something that is really not a thing” (<a href="https://www.jstor.org/stable/2961930?seq=1#metadata_info_tab_contents">Nussbaum, 1995</a>, p. 256–7). It also fits with Kate Manne’s view on misogyny and dehumanization: “Often, it’s not a sense of women’s humanity that is lacking. Her humanity is precisely the problem” (<a href="https://www.penguin.com.au/books/down-girl-9780141990729">Manne, 2018</a>, p. 33). Therefore, the widespread use of female identity in AI artefacts may be rooted in the implicit recognition that women are perceived to be human, and more so than men.</p>
<h2>Objectification of women in the real world?</h2>
<p>This research builds on what makes people human compared to machines to better understand the deep roots of the widespread female gendering of AI. Because feelings are at the very substance of our humanness, and because women are perceived as more likely to experience feelings, we argue that female gendering of AI objects makes them look more human and more likely to consider our unique needs. However, this process of transforming women into objects could lead to women’s objectification by conveying the idea that women are objects and simple tools designed to fulfill their owners’ needs. This may potentially fuel more women’s objectification and dehumanization in the non-digital world.</p>
<p>This research highlights thus the ethical quandary faced by AI designers and policymakers: Women are said to be transformed into objects in AI, but injecting women’s humanity into AI objects makes these objects seem more human and acceptable.</p>
<p>These results are not particularly encouraging for the future of gender parity in AI, nor for ending objectification of women in AI. The development of gender-neutral voices could be a way to move away from the female gendering of AI and stop the perpetuation of this benevolent sexism. Another solution, similar to Google’s <a href="https://www.theverge.com/2019/9/18/20870939/google-assistant-new-voices-nine-countries-languages">recent experimentation</a>, would be to impose a default gender voice, assigning randomly and with an equal probability either a male or a female intelligent bot to users.</p>
<hr>
<p><em>The original paper published in Psychology & Marketing was co-written by Sylvie Borau, Tobias Otterbring, Sandra Laporte, and Samuel Fosso-Wamba.</em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/158666/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Sylvie Borau ne travaille pas, ne conseille pas, ne possède pas de parts, ne reçoit pas de fonds d'une organisation qui pourrait tirer profit de cet article, et n'a déclaré aucune autre affiliation que son organisme de recherche.</span></em></p>Virtual assistants and robots are frequently given female attributes. To curb the massive use of such gendering in AI, we need to better understand the deep roots of this phenomenon.Sylvie Borau, Professeure en Marketing éthique, TBS EducationLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1417832020-10-18T19:06:42Z2020-10-18T19:06:42ZHey Google … what movie should I watch today? How AI can affect our decisions<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/349783/original/file-20200728-33-4dru5w.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=17%2C0%2C5973%2C3988&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Shutterstock</span></span></figcaption></figure><p><em>Social media algorithms, artificial intelligence and our own genetics are among the factors influencing us beyond our awareness. This raises an ancient question: do we have control over our own lives? This article is part of The Conversation’s <a href="https://theconversation.com/au/topics/the-science-of-free-will-88888">series on the science of free will</a>.</em></p>
<hr>
<p>Have you ever used Google Assistant, Apple’s Siri or Amazon Alexa to make decisions for you? Perhaps you asked it what new movies have good reviews, or to recommend a cool restaurant in your neighbourhood.</p>
<p>Artificial intelligence and virtual assistants are constantly being refined, and may soon be making appointments for you, offering medical advice, or trying to sell you a bottle of wine.</p>
<p>Although AI technology has miles to go to develop social skills on par with ours, some AI has shown impressive language understanding and can complete relatively complex interactive tasks.</p>
<p>In several 2018 demonstrations, Google’s AI made <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D5VN56jQMWM">haircut</a> and <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-RHG5DFAjp8">restaurant</a> reservations without receptionists realising they were talking with a non-human.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/D5VN56jQMWM?wmode=transparent&start=67" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">Would you let Google Duplex make phone bookings for you?</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<p>It’s likely the AI capabilities developed by tech giants such as Amazon and Google will only grow more capable of influencing us in the future.</p>
<h2>But what do we actually find persuasive?</h2>
<p>My colleague Adam Duhachek and I <a href="https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0956797620904985">found AI messages are more persuasive</a> when they highlight “how” an action should be performed, rather than “why”. For example, people were more willing to put on sunscreen when an AI explained <em>how</em> to apply sunscreen before going out, rather than <em>why</em> they should use sunscreen.</p>
<p>We found people generally don’t believe a machine can understand human goals and desires. Take Google’s <a href="https://deepmind.com/research/case-studies/alphago-the-story-so-far">AlphaGo</a>, an algorithm designed to play the board game Go. Few people would say the algorithm can understand <em>why</em> playing Go is fun, or <em>why</em> it’s meaningful to become a Go champion. Rather, it just follows a pre-programmed algorithm telling it how to move on the game board.</p>
<p>Our research suggests people find AI’s recommendations more persuasive in situations where AI shows easy steps on how to build personalised health insurance, how to avoid a lemon car, or how to choose the right tennis racket for you, rather than why any of these are important to do in a human sense.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="A robot hand playing the ancient Chinese boardgame called Go" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/349805/original/file-20200728-25-1mvlqnc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/349805/original/file-20200728-25-1mvlqnc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/349805/original/file-20200728-25-1mvlqnc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/349805/original/file-20200728-25-1mvlqnc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/349805/original/file-20200728-25-1mvlqnc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/349805/original/file-20200728-25-1mvlqnc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/349805/original/file-20200728-25-1mvlqnc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">People tend to think of AI as not having free will and therefore not having the ability to explain why something is important to humans.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Shutterstock</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Does AI have free will?</h2>
<p>Most of us believe humans have free will. We compliment someone who helps others because we think they do it freely, and we penalise those who harm others. What’s more, we are willing to lessen the criminal penalty if the person was deprived of free will, for instance if they were in the grip of a schizophrenic delusion.</p>
<p>But do people think AI has free will? We did an experiment to find out. </p>
<p>Someone is given $100 and offers to split it with you. They’ll get $80 and you’ll get $20. If you reject this offer, both you and the proposer end up with nothing. Gaining $20 is better than nothing, but <a href="https://www.researchgate.net/publication/51993135_Foundations_of_Human_Sociality_Economic_Experiments_and_Ethnographic_Evidence_From_Fifteen_Small-Scale_Societies">previous research</a> suggests the $20 offer is likely to be rejected because we perceive it as unfair. Surely we should get $50, right?</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/do-social-media-algorithms-erode-our-ability-to-make-decisions-freely-the-jury-is-out-140729">Do social media algorithms erode our ability to make decisions freely? The jury is out</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>But what if the proposer is an AI? In a research project yet to be published, my colleagues and I found the rejection ratio drops significantly. In other words, people are much more likely to accept this “unfair” offer if proposed by an AI.</p>
<p>This is because we don’t think an AI developed to serve humans has a malicious intent to exploit us — it’s just an algorithm, it doesn’t have free will, so we might as well just accept the $20.</p>
<p>The fact people could accept unfair offers from AI concerns me, because it might mean this phenomenon <em>could</em> be used maliciously. For example, a mortgage loan company might try to charge unfairly high interest rates by framing the decision as being calculated by an algorithm. Or a manufacturing company might manipulate workers into accepting unfair wages by saying it was a decision made by a computer.</p>
<p>To protect consumers, we need to understand when people are vulnerable to manipulation by AI. Governments should take this into account when considering regulation of AI.</p>
<h2>We’re surprisingly willing to divulge to AI</h2>
<p>In other work yet to be published, my colleagues and I found people tend to disclose their personal information and embarrassing experiences more willingly to an AI than a human.</p>
<p>We told participants to imagine they’re at the doctor for a urinary tract infection. We split the participants, so half spoke to a human doctor, and half to an AI doctor. We told them the doctor is going to ask a few questions to find the best treatment and it’s up to you how much personal information you provide.</p>
<p>Participants disclosed more personal information to the AI doctor than the human one, regarding potentially embarrassing questions about use of sex toys, condoms, or other sexual activities. We found this was because people don’t think AI judges our behaviour, whereas humans do. Indeed, we asked participants how concerned they were for being negatively judged, and found the concern of being judged was the underlying mechanism determining how much they divulged.</p>
<p>It seems we feel less embarrassed when talking to AI. This is interesting because many people have grave concerns about AI and privacy, and yet we may be more willing to share our personal details with AI.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="A phone featuring Google Assistant" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/349781/original/file-20200728-23-1xoq6cm.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=32%2C0%2C5431%2C3645&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/349781/original/file-20200728-23-1xoq6cm.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/349781/original/file-20200728-23-1xoq6cm.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/349781/original/file-20200728-23-1xoq6cm.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/349781/original/file-20200728-23-1xoq6cm.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/349781/original/file-20200728-23-1xoq6cm.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/349781/original/file-20200728-23-1xoq6cm.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">As AI develops further, we need to understand how it affects human decision-making.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Shutterstock</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>But what if AI does have free will?</h2>
<p>We also studied the flipside: what happens when people start to believe AI <em>does</em> have free will? We found giving <a href="http://abotdatabase.info/">AI human-like features</a> or a human name could mean people are more likely to believe an AI has free will.</p>
<p>This has several implications:</p>
<ul>
<li><p>AI can then better persuade people on questions of “why”, because people think the human-like AI may be able to understand human goals and motivations</p></li>
<li><p>AI’s unfair offer is less likely to be accepted because the human-looking AI may be seen as having its own intentions, which could be exploitative</p></li>
<li><p>people start feeling judged by the human-like AI and feel embarrassed, and disclose less personal information</p></li>
<li><p>people start feeling guilty when harming a human-looking AI, and so act more benignly to the AI.</p></li>
</ul>
<p>We are likely to see more and different types of AI and robots in future. They might cook, serve, sell us cars, tend to us at the hospital and even sit on a dining table <a href="https://www.amazon.com.au/Robot-Sex-Social-Ethical-Implications/dp/0262036681">as a dating partner</a>. It’s important to understand how AI influences our decisions, so we can regulate AI to protect ourselves from possible harms.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/141783/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>TaeWoo Kim does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Leading tech companies are increasingly using AI to influence our behaviour. But how persuasive do we find virtual assistants?TaeWoo Kim, Lecturer, UTS Business School, University of Technology SydneyLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1262772019-12-15T13:34:20Z2019-12-15T13:34:20ZThe dark side of Alexa, Siri and other personal digital assistants<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/306260/original/file-20191211-95120-uwhi9l.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=0%2C0%2C5991%2C3997&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">In-home digital personal assistant devices are becoming increasingly popular, but their presence raises privacy concerns.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">(Shutterstock)</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>A few short years ago, personal digital assistants like Amazon’s Alexa, Apple’s Siri and Google Assistant sounded futuristic. Now, the future is here and this future is embedded, augmented and ubiquitous.</p>
<p>Digital assistants can be <a href="https://www.wordstream.com/blog/ws/2018/04/10/voice-search-statistics-2018">found in your office, home, car, hotel, phone and many other places</a>. They have recently undergone massive transformation and run on operating systems that are fuelled by artificial intelligence (AI). They observe and collect data in real-time and have the capability to pull information from different sources such as smart devices and cloud services and put the information into context using AI to make sense of the situation. Although we have come a long way in the design and execution of these AI technologies, there is still more work to be done in this arena. </p>
<p>Much of the data that these digital assistants collect and use include personal, potentially identifiable and possibly sensitive information. Can Alexa or other personal digital assistants violate the privacy and security of our data? Possibly. <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2019/oct/09/alexa-are-you-invading-my-privacy-the-dark-side-of-our-voice-assistants">There is a dark side to these virtual assistants</a>.</p>
<p>My expertise is in data privacy, data governance and artificial intelligence. I was previously the Information and Privacy Officer with the Ontario Information and Privacy Commissioner’s Office.</p>
<h2>Welcoming service</h2>
<p>Imagine the following situation.</p>
<p>You are expecting some guests over. Your first guest arrives, and the outdoor security camera on your porch captures her walking up to your home. A polite voice welcomes her and unlocks the door. Once she is inside, your digital assistant explains to your guest that you are on your way and will be home soon. Through your home audio system, your digital assistant plays a selection of your guest’s favourite songs (from your Spotify friends network). Your digital assistant asks your guest if pumpkin spice is still her preferred coffee flavour or if she prefers other ones: french vanilla or Colombian. Soon after, your guest picks the coffee up from the digital coffee machine. Welcoming duties now complete, your digital assistant goes silent, and while waiting for you, your guest makes a few phone calls. </p>
<p>It is fascinating how a digital assistant can accurately and autonomously validate the identity of your guest, select her favourite songs, remember her preferred coffee flavour and manage the smart appliances in your house.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/306262/original/file-20191211-95165-u31ikt.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/306262/original/file-20191211-95165-u31ikt.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/306262/original/file-20191211-95165-u31ikt.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/306262/original/file-20191211-95165-u31ikt.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/306262/original/file-20191211-95165-u31ikt.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/306262/original/file-20191211-95165-u31ikt.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/306262/original/file-20191211-95165-u31ikt.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/306262/original/file-20191211-95165-u31ikt.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">As smart devices become more ubiquitous, maintaining our privacy and that of others requires a new and concerted collective effort.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">(Shutterstock)</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Hosting assistants</h2>
<p>But does your digital assistant’s behaviour concern you? </p>
<p>Digital assistants can record our conversations, images and many other pieces of sensitive personal information, including location via our smartphones. They use our data for machine learning to improve themselves over time. Their software is developed and maintained by companies that are constantly thinking of new ways to collect and use our data. </p>
<p>Similar to other computer programs, the fundamental issue with these digital assistants is that they are vulnerable to technical and process failures. Digital assistants can also be hacked remotely, resulting in breaches of users’ privacy.</p>
<p>For example, an Oregon couple had to unplug their Alexa device, Amazon’s virtual assistant, as their private conversation was <a href="https://www.npr.org/2018/05/25/614315967/oregon-couple-unplugs-alexa-after-it-records-private-conversation">recorded and sent to one of their friends on their contact list</a>. </p>
<p>In another incident, a German man accidentally received access to <a href="https://www.darkreading.com/iot/amazon-slip-up-shows-how-much-alexa-really-knows/d/d-id/1333545">1,700 Alexa audio files belonging to a complete stranger</a>. The files revealed the person’s name, habits, jobs and other sensitive information.</p>
<h2>Awareness privilege</h2>
<p>Increasing popularity and availability of personal digital assistants has resulted in <a href="https://metro.co.uk/2019/09/09/fears-privacy-widening-digital-divide-experts-suggest-10710383/">a widening of the so-called digital divide</a>. The interesting paradox is that individuals who are aware of and sensitive to issues of privacy typically limit their usage of digital tools, while users who are less prone to protect their privacy extensively incorporate personal assistants into their digital lives. </p>
<p>Digital assistants either record data continuously or wait for a word to “wake up” or become activated. They do not limit data collection to the owners’ or authorised users’ information. Personal digital assistants may collect and process unapproved users’ personal data, like their voices. </p>
<p>In the digitally divided society, someone who is privacy savvy would not invite such equipment into their lives, while others may accept or rationalize such behaviours.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/306261/original/file-20191211-95173-15d352f.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/306261/original/file-20191211-95173-15d352f.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/306261/original/file-20191211-95173-15d352f.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=445&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/306261/original/file-20191211-95173-15d352f.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=445&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/306261/original/file-20191211-95173-15d352f.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=445&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/306261/original/file-20191211-95173-15d352f.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=559&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/306261/original/file-20191211-95173-15d352f.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=559&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/306261/original/file-20191211-95173-15d352f.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=559&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Smart devices connect the user to household appliances, with the promise to improve quality of life by making household management easier and more efficient.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">(Shutterstock)</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Respecting others’ privacy</h2>
<p>In this age of ubiquitous devices and internet access, how should we deal with this paradox and respect each others’ space and choices?</p>
<p>Let’s revisit our imaginary personal digital assistant. It had to process different sources of information about the guest to operate as a smart host. Did the digital assistant use all that data to feed the algorithms or to invade the guest’s privacy? Depending on who you ask, the answer will be different.</p>
<p>Our etiquette-conscious upbringing tells us that we have a social and ethical responsibility to respect each others’ values when it comes to digital technologies. But the implications and growth of these technologies have been so significant and rapid that we have not yet been able to redefine our social norms and expectations. </p>
<p>For instance, as a host, do we have an ethical obligation towards our guests to inform them about our personal digital assistant? Is it polite for a home visitor to ask the host to turn their digital tools off? Should we inquire about the presence of smart tools and digital assistants before arriving at a friend’s house, a hotel or an AirBnB? </p>
<p>The answer to these questions is yes, according to <a href="https://emilypost.com/book/emily-posts-manners-in-a-digital-world/">etiquette expert Daniel Post Senning</a>. Senning explains that etiquette is most powerful when you use it as a tool for self-assessment. Would we like to be informed that we are being recorded in a business meeting or a private gathering? Or how do we prefer to be asked to turn digital tools off if we are hosting? The etiquette rules are universal: to be considerate, honest and kind. </p>
<p>Inform your colleagues and guests that your digital devices may record their voices, images or other information. Ask your host to turn off digital assistants if you are not comfortable having them around. But be considerate. You may not want to ask your host to turn off digital assistants in the presence of somebody who is elderly or has a disability and depends on those tools.</p>
<h2>Maintaining our collective privacy</h2>
<p>Privacy is a social norm that we have to work together to maintain. First of all, we need to educate ourselves on cybersafety and potential risks of digital technologies. We should also be proactive in keeping current with the latest news on technologies and take actions when required. </p>
<p>The government’s role in this complex paradigm is critical. We need stronger privacy laws to address privacy issues associated with personal digital assistants. Right now, companies such as Amazon, Google and Apple are making the rules. </p>
<p>Other jurisdictions have developed and implemented regulations such as <a href="https://www.cnet.com/news/alexa-privacy-fears-spark-questions-for-amazon-in-europe/">Europe’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR)</a> which provides oversight on data collection for a wide variety of household devices. Canada should follow suit. </p>
<p>[ <em><a href="https://theconversation.com/ca/newsletters?utm_source=TCCA&utm_medium=inline-link&utm_campaign=newsletter-text&utm_content=thanksforreading">Thanks for reading! We can send you The Conversation’s stories every day in an informative email. Sign up today.</a></em> ]</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/126277/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Rozita Dara does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>When hosting a dinner party, are you obliged to let your guests know that you own a smart device like Amazon Echo or Google Home? The answer is yes, according to a privacy researcher.Rozita Dara, Assistant Professor, Computer Science, University of GuelphLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1149402019-04-10T14:43:49Z2019-04-10T14:43:49ZCurious Kids: who is Siri?<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/268595/original/file-20190410-2927-1im5x47.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=8%2C0%2C5742%2C3785&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/childhood-technology-family-concept-little-kids-1030882333?src=Nsa2ob-AspNt5AZ9KgX_0Q-1-1">Shutterstock.</a></span></figcaption></figure><figure class="align-left ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/165749/original/image-20170419-32713-1kyojyz.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/165749/original/image-20170419-32713-1kyojyz.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=376&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/165749/original/image-20170419-32713-1kyojyz.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=376&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/165749/original/image-20170419-32713-1kyojyz.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=376&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/165749/original/image-20170419-32713-1kyojyz.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=472&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/165749/original/image-20170419-32713-1kyojyz.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=472&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/165749/original/image-20170419-32713-1kyojyz.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=472&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption"></span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/">CC BY-ND</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p><em><a href="https://theconversation.com/au/topics/curious-kids-36782">Curious Kids</a> is a series by <a href="https://theconversation.com/uk">The Conversation</a>, which gives children of all ages the chance to have their questions about the world answered by experts. All questions are welcome: you or an adult can send them – along with your name, age and town or city where you live – to curiouskids@theconversation.com. We won’t be able to answer every question, but we’ll do our best.</em></p>
<hr>
<blockquote>
<p><strong><em>Who is Siri? – Miles, aged four, London, UK.</em></strong></p>
</blockquote>
<p>Thanks for the question, Miles. The first thing to know is that <a href="https://www.apple.com/siri/">Siri</a> is not a “who” – Siri is a “what”. Siri is a “<a href="https://hbr.org/2015/09/the-president-of-sri-ventures-on-bringing-siri-to-life">virtual assistant</a>” which you can control with your voice. </p>
<p>Siri is “virtual” because it is not a real person, and an “assistant” because it can help you out by doing tasks like reading text messages, playing music, taking photos or reminding you when it’s your friend’s birthday. </p>
<p>Siri is part of the computer program, called an “operating system”, which makes Apple devices – like iPhones, computers, watches and iPads – work. By the way, a computer program is a set of written instructions that tells a computer what to do. </p>
<h2>Speaking with Siri</h2>
<p>When you speak to Siri, it will respond and speak back to you. Siri understands all of what you say – not just a few words – because it has a special program, designed to do just that.</p>
<p>You wake Siri up by saying “Hey Siri” to an Apple device. A speech recogniser program in the device listens for these words and uses another program to check that the words are actually “Hey Siri”, and not any other sounds from nearby. </p>
<p>When that happens, Siri will wake up, collect your voice command and change it into a file of data, which the device can understand. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/268615/original/file-20190410-2924-1toxddh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/268615/original/file-20190410-2924-1toxddh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=401&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/268615/original/file-20190410-2924-1toxddh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=401&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/268615/original/file-20190410-2924-1toxddh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=401&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/268615/original/file-20190410-2924-1toxddh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=504&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/268615/original/file-20190410-2924-1toxddh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=504&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/268615/original/file-20190410-2924-1toxddh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=504&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Hey, Siri – can you hear me?</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/pretty-baby-smiles-talk-by-phone-146931245">Shutterstock.</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Most of the program that makes up Siri is not on your device, but on the <a href="https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/abstract/document/4804045">cloud</a>. No, not the ones in the sky – the cloud is a network of computers and programs, accessed through the internet.</p>
<p>So, Siri will send the file with your command in it to the cloud. There, Siri will use Apple’s main computers to access a database of questions and answers, search the internet or connect with apps, so that it can carry out the task you asked it to do. </p>
<p>Once it has done this, it sends the results and actions back to your Apple device. Siri then tells you the answer, or lets you know that it has done what you asked.</p>
<h2>Artificial intelligence</h2>
<p>All this can happen because Siri uses artificial intelligence. Artificial intelligence programs help computers and devices do complex tasks, without humans having to write every step into the program. </p>
<p>Artificial intelligence programs can work out what to do for themselves, and learn as they work. That’s why Siri gets better at understanding your voice, and what you might want, the more you talk to it. </p>
<p>Siri’s original voice is believed to belong to a real person called <a href="https://www.nbcnews.com/technolog/theres-real-human-behind-voice-siri-her-name-susan-8C11337218">Susan Bennet</a>. Susan recorded her voice to help build the technology that Siri uses to recognise your voice. </p>
<p>The people working at Apple will not say whether they used Susan’s voice for Siri – but we do know that in newer versions of Siri <a href="https://searchmobilecomputing.techtarget.com/definition/Siri">hundreds of different voices were used</a> to make the new female voice.</p>
<h2>Why a woman?</h2>
<p>People often ask <a href="https://theconversation.com/theres-a-reason-siri-alexa-and-ai-are-imagined-as-female-sexism-96430">why virtual assistants always have female voices</a>. They think this makes it seem like only women, and not men, can be personal assistants and helpers – or that women are always the assistants and not the bosses.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/268606/original/file-20190410-2931-7whae7.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/268606/original/file-20190410-2931-7whae7.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/268606/original/file-20190410-2931-7whae7.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/268606/original/file-20190410-2931-7whae7.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/268606/original/file-20190410-2931-7whae7.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/268606/original/file-20190410-2931-7whae7.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/268606/original/file-20190410-2931-7whae7.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Your own personal dad-ssistant.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/mixed-race-toddler-child-son-black-1319345612?src=gyceyLGXuYoFYXTJXrWQqA-1-8">Shutterstock.</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Of course we know this is not true – dads, grandads, brothers and uncles can be very helpful too and women can be bosses! The people who created Siri realised this was unfair, and you can now change Siri’s voice to sound like a man. </p>
<p>Siri is named after the company that invented the voice recognition technology it uses, which was called <a href="https://searchmobilecomputing.techtarget.com/definition/Siri">Siri Inc</a>. Apple kept the name when it bought Siri Inc. </p>
<p>Siri was launched in 2011, and was the very <a href="https://voicebot.ai/2017/07/14/timeline-voice-assistants-short-history-voice-revolution/">first voice virtual assistant</a> but others, such as Cortana by Microsoft and Amazon’s Alexa came quickly after. </p>
<p>Soon we will see more virtual assistants in our homes doing jobs for us. Just remember though, they are not people or friends – just very clever, speaking computer programs.</p>
<hr>
<p><em>More <a href="https://theconversation.com/topics/curious-kids-36782?utm_source=TCUK&utm_medium=linkback&utm_campaign=TCUKengagement&utm_content=CuriousKidsUK">Curious Kids</a> articles, written by academic experts:</em></p>
<ul>
<li><p><em><a href="https://theconversation.com/curious-kids-what-are-meteorites-made-of-and-where-do-they-come-from-114408?utm_source=TCUK&utm_medium=linkback&utm_campaign=TCUKengagement&utm_content=CuriousKidsUK">What is a meteorite made of and where do they come from? – the children of Year Five at Leigh St. Mary’s Church of England Primary School, Lancashire, UK.</a></em></p></li>
<li><p><em><a href="https://theconversation.com/curious-kids-why-do-tigers-have-whiskers-110791?utm_source=TCUK&utm_medium=linkback&utm_campaign=TCUKengagement&utm_content=CuriousKidsUK">Why do tigers have whiskers? – Valentina, aged four, London, UK.</a></em></p></li>
<li><p><em><a href="https://theconversation.com/curious-kids-how-did-the-months-get-their-names-113558?utm_source=TCUK&utm_medium=linkback&utm_campaign=TCUKengagement&utm_content=CuriousKidsUK">How did the months get their names? - Sylvie, aged eight, Brisbane, Australia.</a></em></p></li>
</ul><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/114940/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Allison Gardner is affiliated with the following organisations:
Co-founder of Women Leading in AI
Member of IEEE
Member of the Fabian Society
Member of the Labour party and Co-op and a local councillor for Newcastle-under-Lyme Borough council
Member of GMB, Unite and UCU
</span></em></p>The first thing to know is that Siri is not a “who” – Siri is a “what”.Allison Gardner, Teaching Fellow in Bioinformatics/ Head of Foundation Year Science, Keele UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1142622019-03-26T13:56:33Z2019-03-26T13:56:33ZInternet giants could strangle the smart tech revolution at birth – here are our options<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/265862/original/file-20190326-36244-q4y2i8.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Candy crush?</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-vector/phone-smartphone-broken-screen-isolate-on-1315172114">rogistok</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Google is digesting its third whopping antitrust penalty from the European Commission, <a href="http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-19-1770_en.htm">having been fined</a> €1.5 billion (£1.3 billion) for abusing its market dominance around online advertising. The case concerned web publishers embedding a Google-powered search engine on their site, and being prevented from letting third parties place search adverts at the top of search results. </p>
<p>Margrethe Vestager, the EU’s competition commissioner, said this “denied other companies the possibility to compete on the merits and to innovate – and consumers the benefits of competition”. It takes the EC’s total antitrust fines against Google to €8.2 billion in two years, following <a href="https://www.computerworlduk.com/galleries/it-vendors/google-vs-europe-antitrust-battle-timeline-major-milestones-3589424/">previous findings</a> in June 2017 and July 2018, respectively about Google unfairly advantaging its Shopping service and Google Chrome browser. </p>
<figure class="align-right zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/265864/original/file-20190326-36248-atgf2u.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/265864/original/file-20190326-36248-atgf2u.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/265864/original/file-20190326-36248-atgf2u.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=692&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/265864/original/file-20190326-36248-atgf2u.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=692&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/265864/original/file-20190326-36248-atgf2u.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=692&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/265864/original/file-20190326-36248-atgf2u.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=870&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/265864/original/file-20190326-36248-atgf2u.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=870&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/265864/original/file-20190326-36248-atgf2u.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=870&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Elizabeth Warren: break-up call.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/washington-dc-july-25-2016-senator-684236263">Kelly Bell</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>The European Union is not the only one gunning for big tech. UK chancellor Philip Hammond <a href="https://www.itpro.co.uk/policy-legislation/33214/chancellor-hammond-backs-calls-wane-tech-giants-market-power">has hinted about</a> tightening digital competition policy following an independent report which raised concerns that the sector was anti-competitive. And US presidential hopeful Elizabeth Warren <a href="https://medium.com/@teamwarren/heres-how-we-can-break-up-big-tech-9ad9e0da324c">wants</a> the likes of Google, Amazon and Facebook <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/mar/10/elizabeth-warren-break-up-amazon-google-facebook-socialism-capitalism">broken up</a> to unleash a new wave of digital innovation. In an echo of the EC’s Google findings, Warren cites various examples of these companies using their market dominance against smaller rivals – Amazon <a href="https://www.yalelawjournal.org/pdf/e.710.Khan.805_zuvfyyeh.pdf">creating</a> own-brand versions of goods being sold on its platform, for instance. </p>
<p>I broadly agree with this growing movement. Yet my main concern hasn’t come into focus – even though it’s arguably the biggest threat these companies pose to the future. They are standing in the way of the next big digital revolution, and need to be reined in before it’s too late. </p>
<h2>The smart future</h2>
<p>The first computing revolution started in the 1950s as mainframe computers slowly entered the workplace and began to automate basic back-office functions like payroll and accounts. The second revolution, in the 1980s-2000s, centred on the PC and the migration of computers to the desktop and then to our homes. Third came the mobile revolution, which put those computers in our pockets so we could take them wherever we went. </p>
<p>The next shift has started already. In our homes, smart assistants like Amazon Echo and Google Home are steadily colonising personal spaces, along with the likes of smart lighting and security systems. Smart home devices <a href="https://www.idc.com/getdoc.jsp?containerId=prUS44361618">shifted</a> some 640m units last year, and will be doing twice that by 2023. </p>
<p>Over the same period, we can also expect something like 50% growth in unit sales of wearable devices like fitness trackers and smart clothing – a huge market <a href="https://techcrunch.com/2019/03/05/idc-apple-led-wearables-market-in-2018-with-46-2m-of-the-total-172-2m-devices-shipped/">for Apple</a> – to approaching 300m a year. As for the workplace, an equivalent flurry of sensor technology, underpinned by AI, is now transforming factories and production lines. Sometimes known as industry 4.0, the sector is <a href="https://www.globenewswire.com/news-release/2018/10/17/1622652/0/en/Global-Industry-4-0-Market-Will-Reach-USD-155-30-Billion-By-2024-Zion-Market-Research.html">forecast to</a> double to over US$150 billion by 2023, <a href="https://www.researchandmarkets.com/reports/4519307/industry-4-0-market-and-technologies-2018-2023">and over</a> a trillion dollars by the early 2030s. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/265865/original/file-20190326-36252-wk26h6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/265865/original/file-20190326-36252-wk26h6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/265865/original/file-20190326-36252-wk26h6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/265865/original/file-20190326-36252-wk26h6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/265865/original/file-20190326-36252-wk26h6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/265865/original/file-20190326-36252-wk26h6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/265865/original/file-20190326-36252-wk26h6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/265865/original/file-20190326-36252-wk26h6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">From despair to wear.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/man-running-on-beach-modern-technology-501041416">Kaspars Grinwalds</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Hand in hand with this will be an explosion in smart services. Tech companies will increasingly seek to improve our lives by crunching sensor data from all this hardware, as well as from all the activities that we do on our phones. Alongside the tech giants, numerous start-ups are staking out territory in this frontier. </p>
<p>In the US, a company called <a href="https://getnotion.com">Notion</a> has raised US$16m towards smart home sensors to alert owners via a phone app about water leaks, intrusions and temperature fluctuations. British start-up McLear <a href="https://mclear.com/">has launched</a> a smart ring which can electronically unlock doors and authenticate payments in retail outlets. If you look on start-up databases like <a href="https://about.beauhurst.com">Beauhurst</a> or <a href="https://www.crunchbase.com">Crunchbase</a>, you come across thousands of similar companies. </p>
<p>But if there is a rapidly growing ecosystem, there is a competitive imbalance. Just like Notion, many smart devices rely on smartphone apps as the interface through which users control them. With almost 3 billion smartphones in use globally, <a href="http://gs.statcounter.com/os-market-share/mobile/worldwide">almost</a> three quarters are Android devices, controlled by Google, and one quarter are iOS, controlled by Apple. </p>
<p>Apps distributed via these two gatekeepers’ app stores must comply with their regulations. In many cases, the giants themselves will be competing in the same marketplace. We already knew that Apple was betting heavily on health-related wearables services, for instance; the <a href="https://www.cnet.com/how-to/apple-card-what-you-need-to-know-now-about-apples-new-credit-card-for-your-iphone/">Apple credit card</a> announcement shows it also has finance in its sights. </p>
<p>Similarly, Amazon <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2018/feb/28/amazon-buys-video-doorbell-ring-smart-home-delivery">last year spent</a> US$1 billion on smart doorbell maker Ring. Type “smart doorbell” into Amazon’s search box and, perhaps not surprisingly, its own products show up first. As innocent as this might be, one can imagine the temptation for such companies to give preference to their own devices and services when presenting search results. </p>
<h2>There will be blood</h2>
<p>Yet search is actually something of a side issue in all of this. Between them, Amazon, Facebook, Google and Apple hold detailed data on the interests, health, social connections and purchasing habits of billions of people. This data will be an essential input for the AI systems that will power the coming generation of smart services. This, therefore, is the greater threat to competition and innovation. </p>
<figure class="align-right zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/265866/original/file-20190326-36252-1y91lll.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/265866/original/file-20190326-36252-1y91lll.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/265866/original/file-20190326-36252-1y91lll.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=770&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/265866/original/file-20190326-36252-1y91lll.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=770&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/265866/original/file-20190326-36252-1y91lll.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=770&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/265866/original/file-20190326-36252-1y91lll.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=967&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/265866/original/file-20190326-36252-1y91lll.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=967&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/265866/original/file-20190326-36252-1y91lll.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=967&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Oil be darned.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Pascola-Standard-Oil-sign-mo.jpg#/media/File:Pascola-Standard-Oil-sign-mo.jpg">Wikimedia</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>If “data is the new oil”, as many <a href="https://medium.com/@adeolaadesina/data-is-the-new-oil-2947ed8804f6">have argued</a>, then the <a href="https://www.economist.com/business/1999/12/23/standard-ogre">US break-up</a> of Standard Oil in 1911 into 34 companies because of its dominance on oil production and supply is something we should be studying closely. Whether the answer is to break up some tech giants, force them to open up their data assets to new entrants, prevent them buying start-ups in this sector, or allow users more control over their personal data, this is a debate we should have urgently. <a href="https://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/2018/11/20/hike-pressure-tech-giants-share-mapping-data-government-told/">Calls</a> in the UK for big tech to make its mapping data freely available are almost certainly the shape of things to come. </p>
<p>The open nature of the internet over the past 20 years created an environment where innovation could flourish. It is vital that this continues, but legacy monopolies from the previous revolution threaten to slow the process down. Unless digital data is liberalised, smart services could still fall a long way short of their potential. As we saw with the <a href="https://www.whatcar.com/news/history-of-the-electric-car/n18063">electric car</a> throughout the 20th century, vested interests are more than capable of impeding progress to keep their own business activities alive and well.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/114262/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Martin De Saulles does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>There are mounting calls to dismember the likes of Google, Apple and Amazon, but most people seem to have overlooked the biggest threat of all.Martin De Saulles, Principal Lecturer, Centre for Digital Media Culture, University of BrightonLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1090752019-01-10T18:23:28Z2019-01-10T18:23:28Z‘Alexa, call my lawyer!’ Are you legally liable if someone makes a purchase using your virtual assistant?<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/252789/original/file-20190108-32133-1yubmcp.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">If you have voice shopping activated on your voice assistant, anyone in your home could potentially purchase items in your name. </span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/voice-controlled-smart-speaker-1168788433?src=0XXmKVvMBDk7Gc3jWtJkQQ-1-3">Shutterstock</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>When Amazon launched its Alexa virtual assistant in 2014, it probably didn’t think that a bird would expose a potentially significant legal issue with the device. But an African grey parrot named Rocco, living in Blewbury, England, appears to have done just that.</p>
<p>Last month, Rocco <a href="https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/parrot-goes-shopping-with-owner-s-alexa-p59pf0w3h">made headlines</a> for his habit of secretly ordering goods through his owner’s voice-activated Alexa device, which charges purchases to the linked Amazon account. The African grey species, which is renowned for its ability to <a href="https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/experts-parrots-mimic/">mimic human speech</a>, successfully ordered fruit, vegetables, ice-cream, a kettle, light bulbs and a kite. </p>
<p>Virtual assistants such as Alexa are growing in popularity. The number of users worldwide is <a href="https://www.go-gulf.com/blog/virtual-digital-assistants/">projected to reach 1.8 billion by 2021</a>. Unlike some rival models, such as <a href="https://www.gearbrain.com/voice-shopping-with-alexa-explained-2534870941.html">Google Home</a>, Alexa does not have individual voice recognition capability. Since Alexa cannot currently be trained to respond only to a selected person, anyone in your home could purchase items through your account. </p>
<p>Rocco’s ability to manipulate Alexa raises an important question: if someone made an unauthorised purchase on your Alexa device, would you be legally liable to pay for it? </p>
<p>The answer lies in contract law.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/digital-assistants-like-alexa-and-siri-might-not-be-offering-you-the-best-deals-107597">Digital assistants like Alexa and Siri might not be offering you the best deals</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>You are responsible</h2>
<p>The setting for voice purchasing via Alexa can only be be switched on or off. That is, either the function is deactivated so that no one can make vocal purchase orders at all, or it’s calibrated to require a vocal confirmation code to authorise purchases. </p>
<p>In the first case, you cannot enjoy one of the technology’s most convenient features. In the second case, you are still susceptible to a third party – human or capable animal – overhearing and mimicking your voice to make illegitimate purchases. You must then act swiftly to cancel the order in time.</p>
<p>Amazon’s Conditions of Use, which govern voice purchasing through Alexa, <a href="https://www.amazon.com/gp/help/customer/display.html/?nodeId=508088">state</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>You are responsible for maintaining the confidentiality of your account and password and for restricting access to your account, and you agree to accept responsibility for all activities that occur under your account or password.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>A <a href="http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/viewdoc/au/cases/cth/HCA/2004/52.html?context=1;query=toll%20v%20alphapharm;mask_path=">golden rule</a> of Australian contract law is that once you sign a contract you are deemed to have read, understood and accepted the terms – even if you haven’t. This is <a href="http://www.hastingslawjournal.org/wp-content/uploads/Knapp-66.4.pdf">also the legal position</a> in the US, whose laws <a href="https://www.amazon.com/gp/help/customer/display.html/?nodeId=508088">govern the Amazon Conditions of Use</a>. </p>
<p>So, when you sign up to use Alexa, you agree to be responsible for any purchases made on the device by you, your resident parrot, a mischievous friend or relative, or an unwelcome burglar. It doesn’t matter whether you intended the purchase or not.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/theres-a-reason-siri-alexa-and-ai-are-imagined-as-female-sexism-96430">There's a reason Siri, Alexa and AI are imagined as female – sexism</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>There are exceptions</h2>
<p>If your pet is responsible, you will have a stronger case to avoid paying because animals other than humans lack the legal capacity to enter into contracts, so the transaction would be “voidable”. If a human is to blame, which is more likely, there is a legal exception that might still save you having to pay up. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/252786/original/file-20190107-32145-m5fgu0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/252786/original/file-20190107-32145-m5fgu0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/252786/original/file-20190107-32145-m5fgu0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/252786/original/file-20190107-32145-m5fgu0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/252786/original/file-20190107-32145-m5fgu0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/252786/original/file-20190107-32145-m5fgu0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=501&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/252786/original/file-20190107-32145-m5fgu0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=501&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/252786/original/file-20190107-32145-m5fgu0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=501&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">African grey parrots are very good at mimicking human speech.</span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Under both Australian and US law, where a party to a contract is mistaken about the identity of their counterpart, the contract may be void under the “doctrine of mistake”. </p>
<p>In <a href="http://docplayer.net/31614068-L-r-3-app-cas-459-james-cundy-and-t-bevington-v-thomas-lindsay-and-others-house-of-lords-1878-march-1-4.html">Australia</a>, this rule applies where parties do not contract face-to-face, which will always be the case when someone orders through Amazon via Alexa. The critical factor is “materiality” – you need to prove that mistaken identity was vitally important to the transaction. </p>
<p>This will be difficult given Amazon has no interest in who specifically is ordering its products, and the Alexa owner would not normally care who at Amazon’s end has processed the order. But the fact someone made a purchase without the owner’s permission in circumstances where they could not reasonably prevent it might suffice as “material” for the courts.</p>
<p>American law is <a href="https://ianayres.yale.edu/sites/default/files/files/Mutual%20and%20Unilateral%20Mistake%20in%20Contract%20Law(1).pdf">similar</a>. Section 153 of the influential <a href="https://www.nylitigationfirm.com/files/restat.pdf">Restatement (Second) of Contracts</a> states that a party can plead mistake and escape the contract where the mistake is material, and: </p>
<ol>
<li>enforcing the contract would be unconscionable (unjust), or </li>
<li>the other party had reason to know of the mistake or actually caused it through their own fault.</li>
</ol>
<p>Amazon would never be at fault, nor able to tell if an unauthorised party made a purchase on Alexa, so you would need to prove that the transaction was unjust and that mistaken identity was critically important. </p>
<p>A potential snag is the exception stated in Section 154: this says that Section 153 won’t apply if you and the other party have agreed that you will bear the risk. It might come down to how a court reads the Amazon Conditions of Use.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/do-i-want-an-always-on-digital-assistant-listening-in-all-the-time-92571">Do I want an always-on digital assistant listening in all the time?</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>Legal precedents</h2>
<p>Recent <a href="https://www.leagle.com/decision/20051256826ne2d43011253">US court decisions</a> emphasise that the mistake doctrine won’t apply where the other party’s identity is immaterial or irrelevant. Again, it would certainly be relevant where the Alexa owner had no way of preventing the unauthorised purchase (such as criminal activity). Enforcement would be grossly unfair in that situation. </p>
<p>The courts would probably not be as lenient if it were a friend, relative or pet doing the deed, as their use of Alexa is an assumed risk on the owner’s part. But it is still arguable that the owner <a href="https://www.leagle.com/decision/198159653ny2d5431552">should be legally excused</a> because they had no involvement whatsoever in the purchase. The nature and value of the products purchased might also weigh into a court’s assessment.</p>
<p>To avoid a costly lawsuit, Alexa owners should deactivate voice purchasing when the unit is unsupervised, or discretely implement and use a confirmation code for voice purchases. </p>
<p>Users should also regularly check their accounts to ensure that any unauthorised purchases are picked up early and cancelled in time. </p>
<p>Finally, consider a dog instead of a parrot.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/109075/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Mark Giancaspro does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>When an African grey parrot named Rocco made purchases via his owner’s Amazon Alexa voice assistant, it raised questions about who was legally responsible for footing the bill.Mark Giancaspro, Lecturer in Law, University of AdelaideLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1075972018-11-29T02:54:03Z2018-11-29T02:54:03ZDigital assistants like Alexa and Siri might not be offering you the best deals<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/247676/original/file-20181128-32230-8reo6x.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">While personal digital assistants might be helpful, that help is likely to be limited.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Shutterstock</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Your home digital assistant is always listening. But is it always offering you the best content, the cheapest deals, and the right search results? </p>
<p>Digital assistant devices such as Alexa, Google Home, Siri and Cortana are increasingly <a href="https://www.pcworld.idg.com.au/article/642969/voice-assistants-use-grow-1000-reach-275-million-by-2023-juniper-says/">prevalent</a>. These devices listen for every command, their platforms know where you are, and they have a deep and evolving understanding of your preferences. </p>
<p>But there’s a catch. The device can only provide one answer to each question, and that answer will almost certainly be the one that keeps you in the device’s ecosystem. </p>
<p>Each of the major platforms, known as FAANG (for Facebook, Amazon, Apple, Netflix and Google), has its own ecosystem, and advertising revenue is maximised for the platform when a user stays within it. So while personal digital assistants might be helpful, that help is likely to be limited.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/smart-speakers-could-be-the-tipping-point-for-home-automation-90308">Smart speakers could be the tipping point for home automation</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>Shopping around is difficult</h2>
<p>More than one in five people who own a smart speaker now say they <a href="https://www.forbes.com/sites/johnkoetsier/2018/01/09/adobe-echo-google-home-sales-doubled-in-2017-and-22-shop-by-voice/#55f1bbd71931">shop via voice commands</a>.</p>
<p>So what happens when you request a price for a particular product? It probably won’t come as a surprise to learn that if you’re asking Alexa, the assistant will usually offer the price that’s available on <a href="https://www.amazon.com/alexa-voice-shopping/b?ie=UTF8&node=14552177011">Amazon</a>. After all, Alexa is an Amazon product, and Amazon promotes this feature. </p>
<p>Apple’s assistant Siri, on the other hand, will use two pieces of information: the product that you requested, and websites that have pricing. So Siri might suggest Amazon, but it’s unlikely that Alexa will suggest Apple, unless you ask for an Apple product. That means, depending on your device, Siri may offer more options.</p>
<p>At the moment, a Google Home Hub doesn’t allow you to shop, even though Google Shopping, which is accessible online, does. </p>
<h2>Smart home devices aren’t always compatible</h2>
<p>Digital assistants can also help you automate smart devices in your home, which can help minimise energy bills. But here too, you might be restricted by your chosen assistant. </p>
<p>At the moment, most Wi-Fi light globes can be controlled by any of the ecosystems. But as these smart devices become more prevalent, there is a risk that they will be controllable only by one type of assistant. </p>
<p>The smart home manufacturing company <a href="https://nest.com/au/about/">Nest</a>, which is owned by Google’s parent, Alphabet, has some devices that can be managed by Alexa and Siri. For example, Nest thermostats and cameras <a href="https://nest.com/au/support/article/Nest-and-Amazon-Alexa">can be controlled by Alexa</a>. The Nest alarm system, however, is linked to Google Home.</p>
<p>This is an area where there is a risk of “tipping”. That is, where a market leader becomes the preferred provider. Once that happens, products like smart globes no longer need to be compatible with multiple ecosystems, and can be designed to work only with the dominant player. That choice is made by the smart globe manufacturer, not by consumers. ` </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/do-i-want-an-always-on-digital-assistant-listening-in-all-the-time-92571">Do I want an always-on digital assistant listening in all the time?</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>What your assistant knows about you</h2>
<p>While compatibility and getting a good deal are both important, so is your privacy.</p>
<p>All digital assistants listen all of the time. They are listening out for the words that trigger an activity (such as “Hey, Google”). It’s important to recognise that the assistants don’t actually understand the questions that they are asked. Instead, they capture audio and provide the best response to their representation of that audio. This means that assistants are not really listening to your every word. The Alexa app will tell you what Alexa has heard and responded to.</p>
<p>It’s also worth noting that the assistant probably knows when you’re not home. This awareness might flow from you actually telling the assistant that you are off to work, but it’s also available from other parts of the ecosystem. </p>
<p>For example, if you provide your location to use Google maps, your Google Home device will know you’re not at home and that it doesn’t need to listen for your instructions. It may also mean that the advertisements that you are served reflect the fact that you’re on the move.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/the-existential-case-for-ditching-alexa-and-other-ai-93597">The existential case for ditching Alexa and other AI</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>Weighing up the options</h2>
<p>Once you’ve figured out what each assistant might know about you via related products, the next step is deciding on the ecosystem. </p>
<p>As we’ve seen, each personal assistant reinforces a specific infrastructure. For example, Alexa has <a href="https://www.pcworld.idg.com.au/article/647271/one-year-later-alexa-still-only-voice-assistant-sonos-one/">aligned with Sonos</a> for playback hardware, and you cannot currently control Sonos through Google Home.</p>
<p>As a consumer, you get to decide whether the limitations that leave you in a single ecosystem are worthwhile for the convenience offered. The most important question here is whether anyone is informed enough to be able to make that call. </p>
<p>If you really want to know the limitations of your digital assistant, one logical way of learning that might be to ask it. But if you ask a range of assistants what their terms and conditions of service are, you get answers like:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>I’m sorry, I’m not sure about that.</p>
<p>I can’t help you with that right now, but my team is working on it.</p>
<p>I don’t really like talking about myself.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Choosing whether to use a home personal assistant means making a choice about privacy. It also means deciding which ecosystem will best meet your needs. Unfortunately, the assistant itself will not help you much in discovering the limitations of the service that you have chosen.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/107597/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Rob Nicholls does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>It probably won’t surprise you that if you ask Alexa to give you the best price on a product, the assistant will usually offer the price that’s available on Amazon.Rob Nicholls, Senior lecturer in Business Law, UNSW SydneyLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1018662018-08-21T11:25:00Z2018-08-21T11:25:00ZAlexa and Google Home are no threat to regional accents – here’s why<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/232736/original/file-20180820-30587-16yz6f5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/frustrated-woman-kitchen-asking-digital-assistant-1025299729?src=6CJvVzlw4-1ERWfZioKe0w-1-49">Shutterstock</a></span></figcaption></figure><blockquote>
<p>Hey, Google. Can you understand my accent?</p>
<p>Of course. You have an incredibly pleasing dialect.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>So began my Saturday morning discussion with my Google Home Mini. And while I was happy to receive a compliment about my speech, that wasn’t my motivation for asking the question. Our human-to-robot chat was triggered by recent news reports claiming that voice assistants are likely to <a href="https://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/people-drop-regional-accents-for-siri-and-alexa-a3912846.html">“stamp out”</a>, <a href="https://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/3061224/ai-assistants-like-alexa-and-siri-could-kill-off-regional-accents">“kill off”</a> and make us <a href="https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/technology-science/technology/terrifying-reason-you-could-lose-13091094">“lose”</a> our regional accents, described by some as <a href="https://www.thesun.co.uk/tech/7027727/amazon-alexa-apple-siri-google-home-accents-english-regional/">“under threat”</a>.</p>
<p>Another apocalyptic story about language and another call for linguists to do some myth-busting, then.</p>
<p>These scaremongering headlines relate to the findings of <a href="https://www.life.org.uk/news/technology-could-eradicate-regional-accents">a recent survey</a> by the Life Science Centre in Newcastle upon Tyne, which claims that 79% of visitors to its <a href="https://www.life.org.uk/events/robots">Robots – Then and Now</a> exhibition reported altering the way they speak in order to be understood by voice assistants, such as Alexa (Amazon), Google Assistant, Siri (Apple) and Cortana (Microsoft). Crucially, these visitors also reported having regional British accents, and their perceived need to accent-shift highlights two issues.</p>
<p>One issue is practical. People with non-standard accents are more likely to encounter difficulties communicating when interacting with their smart speakers. The other issue is social. Speech technology appears to privilege standard accents, such as southern standard British English (also known as received pronunciation). But what’s important to note is that our virtual assistants are not inherently biased. They’re simply replicating the human biases on which <a href="http://science.sciencemag.org/content/356/6334/183.full">they are modelled</a>.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Hey, Google. Do you like the way I speak?</p>
<p>Sorry, I can’t judge. But I can play you some music.</p>
</blockquote>
<p><a href="http://accentism.org/">Language-based discrimination</a> is all around us and, when we ask our devices to play our favourite song and end up with something different or with a “Sorry, I don’t understand”, it can leave us wondering why our voices aren’t being heard and why these machines seem to be working against those of us with regional accents.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/CYvFxs32zvQ?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">(Warning, contains adult language)</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<p>The internet abounds with clips and complaints. Scottish accents are particularly tricky for voice recognition technology, as shown by <a href="http://www.aclweb.org/anthology/W17-1606">research</a> and popularised by the comedy sketch show, Burnistoun. But we have to bear in mind that recognising the wide variety of English accents that exist is no small feat (consider the various accents spoken within your region, then consider the plethora of accents spoken in English-speaking countries worldwide and by second-language speakers of English).</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/sAz_UvnUeuU?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">(Warning, contains adult language)</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<p><a href="https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/09658416.2014.998232?scroll=top&needAccess=true&journalCode=rmla20">Research</a> suggests that we humans are generally good at recognising where people are from based on their accents but can sometimes struggle, usually owing to a lack of previous exposure. So it makes sense that our virtual assistants also need to gain familiarity with regional accents through linguistic input in order to recognise – or even use – accents when interacting with us.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Hey, Google. Will smart speakers stamp out regional accents?</p>
<p>Sorry, I don’t understand.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Okay, I probably pushed my Google Assistant a bit too far with this question but I was intrigued to see if it would foretell some sort of linguistic doomsday prophecy. And I was prepared to counter the end-times pessimism with the reassuring message that voice assistants won’t lead to the loss of regional accents. Here are just a few reasons why.</p>
<h2>Calm down</h2>
<p>Human-to-robot interactions are much less frequent than human-to-human interactions. The majority of our everyday talk is designed for other humans. Changing our speech a few times a day to interact with smart speakers won’t influence our accents more generally.</p>
<p>Our “smart-speaker accents” resemble accents that we already use on a regular basis. We tend not to change our accents drastically when talking to smart speakers. We might raise our volume, speak more slowly and enunciate more. We might pronounce things differently but only slightly. And we adapt our speech in similar ways in many other contexts: making phone calls, doing job interviews, speaking to people from other cities and countries.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/232746/original/file-20180820-30587-106kxgv.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/232746/original/file-20180820-30587-106kxgv.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=319&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/232746/original/file-20180820-30587-106kxgv.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=319&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/232746/original/file-20180820-30587-106kxgv.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=319&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/232746/original/file-20180820-30587-106kxgv.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=401&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/232746/original/file-20180820-30587-106kxgv.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=401&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/232746/original/file-20180820-30587-106kxgv.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=401&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Will you make us all speak like robots, Siri?</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/voice-recognition-smart-phone-1093963982?src=Wigq7Nfp3kpaLnil5j-MMQ-1-11">Shutterstock</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Accents, and the language we use more generally, are fundamental to who we are. We <a href="http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/1461445605054407">create and enact our identities through language</a> and other social practices. Through our speech, we might emphasise our professionalism in some settings, and our street cred in others. Our accents are often a source of regional pride and <a href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1467-9841.2007.00311.x">linked with a sense of ingroup loyalty and belonging</a>. We’re not robots using an input-output model of language. We speak in certain ways because it’s meaningful to do so.</p>
<p>So, fear not, the end of rich and varied British accents is not nigh. If anything, voice-activated artificial intelligence makes regional speech an increasingly important feature of everyday interactions. Instead of seeing voice assistants as a threat to regional accents, we might be better to embrace the challenge of teaching them our lingo.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Hey, Google. Do you prefer to speak with a particular accent?</p>
<p>I’m afraid you’ll have to put up with this one for now.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>If we look at their ability to produce language, smart speakers have undoubtedly come a long way. My Google Assistant, for example, now speaks German, French, Japanese, Italian and Spanish, plus some language varieties within each category. It can respond to me with an Australian, Canadian, British, American, Indian, Singaporean or Irish accent of English (albeit mainly standard varieties at this stage, and often with glitches). In this sense, they are more representative and inclusive than ever before but, of course, there is still a way to go.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/101866/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Erin Carrie does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Reports of the death of accents have been greatly exaggerated.Erin Carrie, Senior Lecturer in Linguistics, Manchester Metropolitan UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/925712018-07-16T10:39:31Z2018-07-16T10:39:31ZDo I want an always-on digital assistant listening in all the time?<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/227596/original/file-20180713-27036-7hie8i.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Siri, should you even be here?</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/woman-kitchen-asking-digital-assistant-question-1007322088">Daisy Daisy/Shutterstock.com</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>The smart device market is <a href="https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/parks-associates-us-broadband-households-will-buy-almost-55-million-smart-home-devices-in-2020-300556479.html">exploding</a>. Smart home kits for retrofitting “non-smart” houses have <a href="http://www.latimes.com/home/la-hm-smart-home-devices-home-automation-budget-guide-20171127-story.html">become cheaper</a>.
Earlier this year, Apple released the <a href="https://www.apple.com/homepod/">HomePod speaker</a>, the company’s response to dominant smart devices <a href="https://store.google.com/us/product/google_home">Google Home</a> and <a href="https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0749WVS7J/">Amazon Echo</a>. Amazon, too, is expanding its lineup. Recently, it debuted the <a href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0186JAEWK/">Amazon Echo Look</a>, promising to make users more stylish. </p>
<p>All of these smart devices are equipped with an artificially intelligent virtual assistant, which allows users to interact with their devices hands-free. These devices, which vow to make your life easier, have another thing in common: They often have <a href="https://www.wsj.com/articles/all-ears-always-on-listening-devices-could-soon-be-everywhere-1531411250">microphones on all the time</a> to listen for your requests.</p>
<p>As a <a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=ZBgs73QAAAAJ&hl=en">scholar of rhetoric and technology</a>, I study how people make sense of new technological innovations. <a href="https://doi.org/10.1080/15295036.2018.1488082">My research</a> outlines several reasons why people might find these smart devices equipped with an always-on microphone attractive as well as unsettling.</p>
<h2>Convenience matters</h2>
<p>First, smart devices offer exceptional convenience at an unprecedentedly low cost. Amazon, Apple, Microsoft and Google all pitch their products as ways to make users more efficient by outsourcing tasks. This isn’t new. Wealthier people have long relied on the labor of others to manage their households and workspaces. Smart home technologies promise similar effects. They can automate chores, including <a href="https://www.irobot.com/For-the-Home/Vacuuming/Roomba.aspx">vacuuming</a>, <a href="https://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/reviewedcom/2017/01/04/finally-a-fridge-with-alexa-that-orders-groceries-for-you/">grocery shopping</a> and <a href="https://www.nomiku.com/products/wifi-nomiku">even cooking</a>.</p>
<p>Artificial intelligence, algorithms and automation now execute tasks for those who can afford smart devices. As a result, more and different people may take advantage of a digital assistant than would use, or could afford, a human assistant.</p>
<h2>Increasing autonomy</h2>
<p>For example, hands-free technologies may increase autonomy for the elderly and individuals with disabilities. Scholars are investigating how smart devices can support “universal design,” a way of making spaces and activities <a href="https://content.iospress.com/articles/technology-and-disability/tad00132">accessible and convenient for people of all abilities</a>. Smart home systems can assist people with physical or cognitive impairments by automating crucial activities and services, such as opening and closing doors, or contacting medical professionals.</p>
<p>Such systems may offer people increased autonomy in their homes. For instance, in Boulder, Colorado, <a href="https://imaginecolorado.org/services/imagine-smarthomes">Imagine! Smart Homes</a> are equipped with smart home systems so that people with cognitive disabilities “may remain in more independent and natural settings.” <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2011.02.010">Interviews with elderly users</a> suggest that technologies that monitor a person’s health and movement around the home can help people “<a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/where-we-live/wp/2018/02/26/technology-that-can-foster-aging-in-place/">aging-in-place</a>.”</p>
<h2>Ubiquitous surveillance and security concerns</h2>
<p>While smart home technologies can offer feelings of comfort and security for some users, there may also be security risks associated with an always-on microphone.</p>
<p>Smart home systems are part of a larger suite of devices, apps, websites and spaces that collect, aggregate and analyze personal data about users. Scholars call this “ubiquitous surveillance,” which means “it becomes <a href="https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=F8nhCfrUamEC&oi=fnd&pg=PA91&dq=Mark+Andrejevic,+%E2%80%9CUbiquitous+Surveillance,%E2%80%9D+&ots=y-brIioWM4&sig=UJX2_HnRNmoU1aquLMbCqyH9rEs#v=onepage&q=Mark%20Andrejevic%2C%20%E2%80%9CUbiquitous%20Surveillance%2C%E2%80%9D&f=false">increasingly difficult to escape</a> … data collection, storage, and sorting.” </p>
<p>Smart devices require data – yours and others’ – to serve you well. To get the full benefits of smart home systems, users must share their locations, routines, tastes in music, shopping history and so forth. On one hand, a well-connected device can manage your digital life quite well. </p>
<p>On the other hand, providing so much personal information benefits companies like Amazon. As they <a href="https://www.cnbc.com/2017/12/26/amazon-digital-advertising-push-in-2018.html">gain access to users’ personal information</a>, they may monetize it in the form of targeted advertisements or collect and sell your personal characteristics, even if it’s <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-intersect/wp/2016/08/19/98-personal-data-points-that-facebook-uses-to-target-ads-to-you">separated</a> from your <a href="https://www.amazon.com/gp/help/customer/display.html?nodeId=202075050">name or address</a>. Perhaps that’s why Wired magazine says, “<a href="https://www.wired.com/2012/10/amazon-next-advertising-giant/">Amazon’s Next Big Business Is Selling You</a>.” Not all companies have the same privacy policies. Apple says it <a href="https://www.apple.com/privacy/">won’t sell its users’</a> personal information to others. Still, potential users should decide how much of their intimate lives they’re willing to share.</p>
<p>Smart homes come with broader security concerns. Unsecured devices connected to the “internet of things” can be <a href="https://theconversation.com/russians-hack-home-internet-connections-heres-how-to-protect-yourself-95907">targets for hackers</a>. Access to smart devices might provide hackers a <a href="https://theconversation.com/4-ways-internet-of-things-toys-endanger-children-94092">well-spring of useful data</a>, including information about when users are home – or not. Additionally, smart objects can be deployed surreptitiously for nefarious purposes. In 2016, the <a href="https://www.wired.com/2016/12/botnet-broke-internet-isnt-going-away">Mirai botnet</a> commandeered unsuspecting users’ <a href="https://doi.org/10.1109/MC.2017.201">IoT devices for use in a distributed denial-of-service attack</a>. </p>
<p>There’s another, perhaps less exciting, risk: Devices with always-on microphones can’t always tell who is talking. Recently, Alexa users reported that their <a href="https://www.popsci.com/how-to-stop-amazon-alexa-buying-things-you-dont-want">children ordered unwanted items from Amazon</a>. Others noted that background sounds, <a href="https://www.theverge.com/2017/1/7/14200210/amazon-alexa-tech-news-anchor-order-dollhouse">like the TV</a>, prompted unauthorized purchases. These vocal triggers – called “false positives” when they prompt devices to do something unexpected or unwanted – have led to users <a href="https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2018/05/amazon-confirms-that-echo-device-secretly-shared-users-private-audio/">unknowingly sharing private conversations</a> with others.</p>
<p>In early 2018, Amazon Echo users were forced to confront these security risks when Alexa began <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/08/business/alexa-laugh-amazon-echo.html">laughing, apparently unprompted</a>. Although <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/08/business/alexa-laugh-amazon-echo.html">Amazon later said</a> that the laugh was an unfortunate false positive response to nearby conversations, the <a href="https://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/2018/03/07/alexas-weird-random-laughter-freaking-people-out/404476002/">laughter prompted some users to reconsider</a> letting Alexa into their most intimate spaces.</p>
<h2>Objects like people</h2>
<p>Potential surveillance and security concerns aside, users must consider the consequences of human-like virtual assistants in smart devices. It is not a coincidence that Siri, Alexa, Cortana and now <a href="https://www.cnbc.com/2016/10/24/bank-of-america-launches-ai-chatbot-erica--heres-what-it-does.html">Erica, Bank of America’s digital assistant</a>, are gendered feminine – and not just their voices. Historically, women were assigned to tasks related to their roles as mother or wife. As women joined the workforce, they continued to perform these roles in “<a href="https://www.businessinsider.com.au/pink-collar-jobs-dominated-by-women-2015-2">pink collar</a> jobs.” </p>
<p>Siri and Alexa perform similar tasks, <a href="https://www.shape.com/lifestyle/mind-and-body/how-turn-amazonalexa-%20your-own-personal-zen-coach">taking care of users</a> while also offering <a href="https://www.wired.com/2016/06/spent-week-yelling-siri-macos-sierra/">administrative support</a>. Some even consider Alexa to <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/07/opinion/sunday/children-alexa-echo-robots.html">be a co-parent</a>. </p>
<p>My <a href="https://doi.org/10.1080/15295036.2018.1488082">research shows</a> that gendering virtual assistants invites users to engage with smart devices because they’re familiar and comfortable. Some users may be willing to share more intimate details about themselves despite security or surveillance risks. Ultimately, people may grow <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2016.12.047">to rely upon devices</a>, which empowers those who own the data harvested from always-on devices in the home.</p>
<p>Smart device users must weigh the significant conveniences of a device with an always-on microphone against the substantial concerns. Some of these concerns – security and surveillance – are pragmatic. Others – about whether devices should have a gender – are decidedly more philosophical. The bottom line is this: When people ask devices to act for them, they must be willing to live with what – or who – is on the other side.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/92571/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Heather Woods has received funding from the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, and receives funding from Kansas State University.</span></em></p>There are several reasons people might find smart devices equipped with an always-on microphone both attractive and unsettling.Heather Woods, Assistant Professor of Rhetoric and Technology, Kansas State UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/915792018-02-09T18:42:30Z2018-02-09T18:42:30ZApple HomePod is already losing the smart speaker battle<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/205700/original/file-20180209-51731-fttx3s.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.apple.com/uk/newsroom/2017/06/homepod-reinvents-music-in-the-home/">Apple</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>The war for your digital home is waging. Apple has finally followed Amazon, Google and Microsoft by launching a smart speaker with a voice-controlled artificial intelligence assistant. Yet even though the “HomePod” is another technological marvel, there’s a chance Apple is already losing the battle.</p>
<p>The competition isn’t just through the sound quality of the speaker – but the other things that users can do with it. The <a href="https://www.theverge.com/2018/2/6/16976906/apple-homepod-review-smart-speaker">most common requests</a> to AI personal assistants such as Apple’s Siri are reportedly to play music, read the weather forecast and set timers or reminders.</p>
<p>But the capabilities of these assistants are increasing at lightning speed. This doesn’t just rely on the sophistication of the artificial intelligence involved but also what other technology the assistant can link to. And given Apple’s tendency to reject open connections to other companies’ systems, it may find it has some serious catching up to do.</p>
<p>Apple’s HomePod is entering an already busy marketplace. Probably the most famous smart speaker is Amazon’s Echo, which runs the AI assistant Alexa. Because Amazon opened up its system for anyone to write software programs for it, Alexa now has <a href="https://www.voicebot.ai/2017/12/15/amazon-alexa-skill-count-officially-passes-25000-u-s/">over 25,000</a> specific capabilities or “skills” in its US version alone, up from 5,000 just over a year ago. It can now read out recipes, order a pizza, turn on the lights or tell jokes. Partly because it was the first major smart speaker released, Echo has a greater depth of capabilities than any of its rivals.</p>
<p>Google Home, which features the creatively named Google Assistant, can link to multiple Google accounts so you can check your calendar or manage reminders. But it also <a href="https://www.theverge.com/2017/10/8/16439458/google-home-update-feature-list-skills">links to your Android phone</a> so you can make calls through the speaker or view on a screen the results of internet searches you ask it to make.</p>
<p>Microsoft has partnered with electronics manufacturer Harman Kardon to create a speaker called Invoke powered by Microsoft’s Cortana assistant. It also allows you to check your calendar and reminders, as well as make Skype calls, but only for one Microsoft account. Its AI capabilities are also <a href="https://www.businessnewsdaily.com/10315-siri-cortana-google-assistant-amazon-alexa-face-off.html">not nearly as developed</a> as either Google Assistant or Amazon Alexa.</p>
<p>Apple is taking a different approach to its rivals, hoping to corner the higher end of the smart speaker market and encourage consumers to <a href="https://www.forbes.com/sites/ewanspence/2014/09/30/how-apple-makes-you-spend-money/#23bb42b42aeb">part with more money</a>, as it has done very successfully with its other products. The HomePod delivers high quality sound using seven physical speakers arranged in a circle to create a virtual stereo effect, directing different parts of the sound in different directions.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/205701/original/file-20180209-51694-1cc4tm4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/205701/original/file-20180209-51694-1cc4tm4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=555&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/205701/original/file-20180209-51694-1cc4tm4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=555&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/205701/original/file-20180209-51694-1cc4tm4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=555&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/205701/original/file-20180209-51694-1cc4tm4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=697&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/205701/original/file-20180209-51694-1cc4tm4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=697&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/205701/original/file-20180209-51694-1cc4tm4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=697&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Virtual speaker.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.apple.com/uk/newsroom/2018/01/homepod-arrives-february-9-available-to-order-this-friday/">Apple</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>But HomePod isn’t really a smart speaker – not yet at least. Siri currently can’t deliver on one of those three most critical abilities, as it can <a href="https://www.theverge.com/2018/2/6/16976906/apple-homepod-review-smart-speaker">only set one timer at a time</a>. Overall it has <a href="https://venturebeat.com/2017/06/02/apple-is-expected-to-improve-siris-capabilities-at-wwdc/">far fewer skills</a> than Alexa, Google Assistant or <a href="http://www.zdnet.com/article/microsofts-cortana-now-has-230-skills-and-amazons-alexa-25000/">even Cortana</a> and only works with a very small number of <a href="https://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/talkingtech/2017/07/13/hey-siri-why-cant-use-you-more-apps/457008001/">third-party apps</a>.</p>
<p>It’s easy to assume that Apple’s technological and financial might will allow it to catch up. But the way its underlying system operates may not make it so easy. Google Assistant is available on all Android and iOS devices, as well as Chromebooks and third-party devices <a href="https://www.pocket-lint.com/headphones/buyers-guides/143305-best-google-assistant-headphones-smart-sounds-from-bose-sony-and-more">such as headphones</a>. Cortana comes standard on Windows machines but it’s also available for download on Android and iOS.</p>
<p>Alexa is accessible through some third-party devices such as speakers (although to a lesser extent than Assistant or Cortana) and will soon be available <a href="https://www.theverge.com/2018/1/8/16861502/amazon-alexa-windows-10-app">on some Windows PCs</a>. The most basic Amazon Echo speaker is also available for less than US$40 (£40 in the UK), making it significantly cheaper than US$349 HomePod. This means it is very easy for consumers to try an Echo out or even place multiple devices around their home, helping spread the technology more widely.</p>
<p>Apple’s Siri, on the other hand, is not available on any third-party devices. So while its rivals are spreading their AI into every corner of our lives, Apple is keeping it locked up in the company’s expensive products. And any software makers that are allowed into Apple’s walled garden have to custom develop their products for the underlying Apple platform but can’t even deploy them across all devices. Apple would need to mobilise a considerable number of developers to enlarge its capabilities beyond this.</p>
<p>The competition for voice-controlled smart devices has really only just begun, and smart homes will soon be followed by AI in our cars and offices. As such, each player has its own advantages. Amazon can get anything delivered to you. Google is already known for being able to answer almost any question and help you get from A to B. Microsoft products can be found in almost every workplace.</p>
<p>While these firms each want to become your assistant everywhere, Apple is betting instead on your love of sound quality. But getting the right answers matters to consumers – and at the moment it looks like Siri doesn’t even understand the questions. If Apple continues to stick to its closed system, it’s hard to see how it will ever start to win again.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/91579/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Bettina Büchel does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Apple’s closed system may be its undoing in the smart home market.Bettina Büchel, Professor of Strategy and Organisation, International Institute for Management Development (IMD)Licensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/903082018-01-24T19:19:42Z2018-01-24T19:19:42ZSmart speakers could be the tipping point for home automation<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/202986/original/file-20180123-182955-1p4yoi.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">There has been a resurgence in home automation with the advent of voice-activated digital assistants. </span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-illustration/consumer-electronics-isometric-concept-images-house-785607967?src=czcaD0-l_-heHS_-Mov0Yw-1-12">Shutterstock</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>One of the biggest trends of the Consumer Electronics Show (CES) in Las Vegas this year was companies taking <a href="https://www.recode.net/2018/1/12/16881136/ces-2018-products-gadgets-consumer-electronics-show-kara-swisher-lauren-goode-ashley-carman-podcast">digital smart assistants</a> – think Apple’s Siri, Google’s Assistant and Amazon’s Alexa – and incorporating them into <a href="https://www.forbes.com/sites/danielnewman/2018/01/16/top-18-tech-trends-at-ces-2018/#3fce3df6452f">more and more consumer devices</a>. </p>
<p>From smart light bulbs to smart toilets, it’s clear that the market sees great promise in <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2018/jan/12/ces-2018-voice-controlled-showers-robots-smart-toilets-ai">devices you can speak to, combined with home devices you can control</a>. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/202723/original/file-20180121-110094-1mgdds4.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/202723/original/file-20180121-110094-1mgdds4.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/202723/original/file-20180121-110094-1mgdds4.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/202723/original/file-20180121-110094-1mgdds4.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/202723/original/file-20180121-110094-1mgdds4.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/202723/original/file-20180121-110094-1mgdds4.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/202723/original/file-20180121-110094-1mgdds4.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">MacSpeak, an early Computer Speech Recognition system.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Via Macintosh Repository</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>‘Siri, define <em>computer</em> for me’</h2>
<p>We’ve always been fascinated with the ability to <a href="https://theconversation.com/listen-to-me-machines-learn-to-understand-how-we-speak-42812">speak to a computer</a>. </p>
<p>Fifty years ago when Star Trek debuted, Gene Roddenberry envisioned an interface where you could simply speak into the air and ask the “Computer” to do something and it would respond intelligently. </p>
<p>Once computers shrank to fit on your desk in the 1980’s, this vision was quickly realised through software such as <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_ViaVoice">ViaVoice</a>, <a href="https://shop.nuance.com/store?Action=Custom&Locale=en_AU&SiteID=scsoftAP&cvokeywordid=432%7C122541&cvosrc=&gclid=Cj0KCQiAkZHTBRCBARIsAMbXLhH8dlih-CUD02Tap3m5_MmeEEEFW5nC5YY92cghZW_DH1DSntFAocUaAoF-EALw_wcB&pbpage=resp-dragon-home&utm_campaign=&utm_medium=&utm_source=google&utm_term=dragon+naturally+speaking">Dragon Naturally Speaking</a>, or <a href="https://www.macintoshrepository.org/8400-macspeak">MacSpeak</a>. But due to the technology of the time, it was limited to the tasks you could complete on your computer – and to the room your computer was in. </p>
<p>They even made a joke about it in Star Trek IV in 1996:</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/LkqiDu1BQXY?wmode=transparent&start=64" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">Star Trek IV - Computer?</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/the-smart-home-could-worsen-domestic-abuse-but-the-same-technology-may-also-make-us-safer-82897">The smart home could worsen domestic abuse. But the same technology may also make us safer</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>This really started to change with the advent of smart phones. </p>
<p>When <a href="https://www.apple.com/au/ios/siri/">Siri was introduced in 2011</a>, many smart phones evolved to have their own digital assistant. And because you carried your smart phone with you everywhere, the voice digital assistant finally escaped a single room. It was usable in any room of the house, and for more eclectic queries than ever before.</p>
<h2>‘Alexa, play some rock music please’</h2>
<p>But something was still missing from the equation. Despite the proliferation of digital assistants in devices like the Apple/Google <a href="https://www.apple.com/au/apple-watch-series-3/">watch</a>, the Apple/Android <a href="https://www.apple.com/au/apple-tv-4k/">TV</a> and your <a href="https://www.apple.com/au/airpods/">personal headphones</a>, it was still not quite Star Trek. When Captain Kirk wanted to speak to the computer, he didn’t hold a device to his ear or speak into his watch, he simply made a request into the ether and was greeted by a <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fJfkYjrbPS4">computerised response</a>. </p>
<p>And in 2015, Amazon finally made that a reality with the <a href="https://www.amazon.com.au/Introducing-Amazon-generation-Charcoal-Fabric/dp/B0749WVS6H">Amazon Echo and the digital assistant Alexa</a>. Through the skills interface, Alexa could do much more than previous assistants, and understood you better. </p>
<p>This change served to democratise the use of technology. All of a sudden, users didn’t need to worry about the interface. If you could use the right words to speak to Alexa then she could get the job done for you. </p>
<p>Adding things to your shopping list, or setting some kitchen timers didn’t require any knowledge of the machine and how it worked – as long as you could say “Alexa, set a 10 minute timer for the pasta”, you could use these devices. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/if-google-assistant-or-siri-arent-smart-enough-for-you-you-can-build-your-own-ai-67172">If Google Assistant or Siri aren't smart enough for you, you can build your own AI</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Amazon has doubled down on this in recent iterations, with the <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/nov/24/amazon-echo-show-review-video-smart-speaker-screen-digital-photo-frame-kitchen">launch of the Echo Show</a> which includes a screen and a “drop in” call functionality for checking on elderly relatives.</p>
<h2>‘OK Google, turn on the porch lights and open the garage door’</h2>
<p>Which brings us back to CES and the <a href="https://www.investors.com/news/technology/click/smart-speakers-to-emerge-as-trojan-horse-at-ces-2018-forum/">proliferation of smart assistants</a>. Once you’ve achieved the ability to speak to a digital assistant from any room in the house, what’s the obvious next step? </p>
<p>Make the house able to listen.</p>
<p>There are <a href="https://theconversation.com/security-risks-in-the-age-of-smart-homes-58756">legitimate security concerns</a> associated with connecting devices in your house to the internet. However, since the debut of Alexa, other tech companies have got on the bandwagon. </p>
<p>Google launched the <a href="https://store.google.com/product/google_home">Google Home</a> in 2016; Apple announced it will launch its <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/technology/technology-news/apple-homepod-to-hit-stores-february-9-20180123-p4yysn.html">HomePod device on February 9</a> (after being delayed from a December launch); and at CES even Samsung showed off new ways its Bixby digital assistant could appear in the home. </p>
<p>And together with the rise of digital assistants (<a href="https://theconversation.com/its-not-just-your-tv-listening-in-to-your-conversation-37409">all your devices truly are listening</a>), home automation has also seen a resurgence. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/smart-home-gadgets-promise-to-cut-power-bills-but-many-lie-idle-or-can-even-boost-energy-use-82252">'Smart home' gadgets promise to cut power bills but many lie idle – or can even boost energy use</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Long considered a <a href="https://theconversation.com/out-with-the-keyboard-as-talk-takes-over-typing-35951">hobbyist pursuit</a>, only for geeks and nerds, it would appear that the arrival of smart speakers has provided the tipping point that home automation needed to truly enter the mainstream. </p>
<p>Rather than expecting users to use an esoteric interface on their phone to control these devices, smart speakers allow for a truly seamless experience, allowing users to <a href="https://support.google.com/googlehome/answer/7073578?hl=en-AU">control their home using natural voice commands</a>. </p>
<p>Whether it’s turning on the bedroom lights, playing your favourite play list on the living room television, or just checking to make sure the front door is locked, the combination of home automation and smart speakers is providing a push forward for both technologies, as we truly move to a smart home powered by a smart digital assistant.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/afk5u9EdRVc?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">Google Home allows you to control lights, locks and the temperature in your house.</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<p>But most importantly, it’s good to know that if “Professor” Scotty from Star Trek were to come back 30 years later, he’d be much more impressed with our ability to speak to our devices – even if he would have to get used to saying “Ok Google” rather than “Computer”.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/90308/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Michael Cowling does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Once you have the ability to speak to a digital assistant from any room in the house, the obvious next step is to make the house able to listen.Michael Cowling, Senior Lecturer in Educational Technology, CQUniversity AustraliaLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/705402016-12-27T08:01:42Z2016-12-27T08:01:42ZWhy connecting all the world’s robots will drive 2017’s top technology trends<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/150519/original/image-20161216-26082-pnrnzt.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Shutterstock</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>If you want to make predictions for the future, you need to find the trajectory of events in the past. So to work out what shape digital technology will likely take next year, we should look back to the major developments of 2016. And the past year’s developments point to a 2017 shaped by the next phase of virtual and augmented reality, the emergence of an internet for artificial intelligence and the creation of personalised digital assistants that follow us across devices.</p>
<h2>Virtual world</h2>
<p>One technology in particular has dominated the news throughout the year and made the birthday wish-lists of children and adults alike: virtual reality. VR began to bloom commercially in 2016 – <a href="http://www.techradar.com/reviews/wearables/htc-vive-1286775/review">with HTC</a>, <a href="http://www.techradar.com/reviews/gaming/gaming-accessories/oculus-rift-1123963/review">Oculus (owned by Facebook)</a> <a href="http://www.techradar.com/reviews/gaming/playstation-vr-1235379/review">and PlayStation</a> all releasing their latest headsets. But 2017 will almost certainly be a pivotal year for VR, given its rather precarious position on the “<a href="http://www.gartner.com/technology/research/methodologies/hype-cycle.jsp">hype cycle</a>”. </p>
<p>This is a research methodology for predicting the commercial dominance of an emerging technology as it matures and goes through periods of increasing hype, sudden disillusionment and eventual success. Presently VR is on the precipice of the “peak of inflated expectations”, where the hype exceeds the reality and quality comes second to novelty.</p>
<p>In the hype cycle model, the peak of excitement is followed by an inevitable fall (the “trough of disillusionment”), as consumers realise the gap between what they expect and what they actually get. Here is where opinion is divided on VR. For some this will be a <a href="http://fortune.com/2016/10/13/virtual-reality-headsets/">gentle dip</a>, while for others the drop will be a <a href="http://www.wsj.com/articles/why-the-virtual-reality-hype-is-about-to-come-crashing-down-1463976001">portent to collapse</a>. </p>
<p>The big question splitting these opinions is whether the consumer reaction to the VR games and applications currently being released will be the wrath of disillusionment or the mercy of patience. The more convincing assertion is that <a href="https://www.wired.com/2015/03/future-virtual-reality-inside-smartphone/">mobile phone-based</a> VR platforms (with their greater ease of use, lower cost and wider range of games and applications) will help stabilise VR throughout 2017.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/150500/original/image-20161216-16735-1wfyatb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/150500/original/image-20161216-16735-1wfyatb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/150500/original/image-20161216-16735-1wfyatb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/150500/original/image-20161216-16735-1wfyatb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/150500/original/image-20161216-16735-1wfyatb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/150500/original/image-20161216-16735-1wfyatb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/150500/original/image-20161216-16735-1wfyatb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">More than a gaming platform?</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Shutterstock</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Augmented success</h2>
<p>But stability is not the same as success. VR also has the problem that its consumer appeal is primarily recreational, limited largely to games and <a href="http://gizmodo.com/youtubes-ready-to-blow-your-mind-with-360-degree-videos-1690989402">360-degree videos</a>. So far it has had relatively little impact on social or functional applications such as providing an interface for social media.</p>
<p>The same cannot be said for its more versatile but currently less well-known cousin, <a href="https://theconversation.com/do-we-want-an-augmented-reality-or-a-transformed-reality-31642">augmented reality</a>. AR – which involves overlaying images of the real world with additional graphics or information – has enjoyed much success of late as a gaming platform, particularly thanks to the release of <a href="https://theconversation.com/pokemon-go-is-a-blueprint-for-the-rise-of-robots-62359">Pokémon Go</a>.</p>
<p>Yet AR functionality already goes beyond games, and it is an ideal delivery mechanism for limitless forms of digital information. Concepts include heads-up displays attached to cyclists’ helmets that provide them with a 360-degree field of view and also alert them to potential dangers by tracking <a href="http://www.livescience.com/56471-augmented-reality-optic-bike-helmet.html">overtaking vehicles</a>. But also applications such as visual overlays that can virtually redecorate your entire home <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-37761202">without a single lick of paint</a>.</p>
<p>The real future of AR however is in it’s potential to give us a new and improved means of accessing content and services we already cannot do without. As <a href="https://theconversation.com/with-hololens-the-future-of-reality-is-augmented-37104">Microsoft’s HoloLens</a> and <a href="https://theconversation.com/google-glass-finally-cracks-it-was-a-product-looking-for-a-market-36440">Google Glass</a> have alluded to, 2017 could see us using AR to check our emails, posting on Facebook and discovering the best route to our meeting place across town, with all content delivered straight to our eyes. Not a single aversion of our gaze or break in our stride required. </p>
<p>Current investment in the sector is prioritising advances in relevant underlying technologies such as <a href="http://vrscout.com/news/apple-duel-camera-iphone-for-augmented-reality/">depth-sensing camera lenses</a> and <a href="http://www.theverge.com/2016/12/9/13892166/occipital-bridge-mobile-vr-ar-headset-impressions-test-price">physical environment mapping systems</a>. This suggests that the industry is readying hardware to ensure these exciting ideas can materialise. It doesn’t mean that all ambitions of AR will be realised in 2017, but they are tantalising possibilities, depending on whether the underlying technology can make them a reality.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/150521/original/image-20161216-26133-1yh50nf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/150521/original/image-20161216-26133-1yh50nf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/150521/original/image-20161216-26133-1yh50nf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/150521/original/image-20161216-26133-1yh50nf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/150521/original/image-20161216-26133-1yh50nf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/150521/original/image-20161216-26133-1yh50nf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/150521/original/image-20161216-26133-1yh50nf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Intelligent connection.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Shutterstock</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Internet of Robots</h2>
<p>The other area where we are likely to see some fascinating research developments moving into commercial applications is artificial intelligence and machine learning. And the application most likely to dominate 2017 is the <a href="https://theconversation.com/explainer-the-internet-of-things-16542">Internet of Things</a>, the connection of millions of ordinary devices, from cameras to kettles, to the internet.</p>
<p>The concept of the Internet of Things champions our seeming desire for constant connection, with the physical objects we use everyday all linked together in a glorious (or terrifying) chain. 2017 could be the year we’ll all be telling our telling our barista coffee machine at home to prepare us a chocolate fudge Café Cubano from five miles away, using a bespoke interface in our car as we’re driving home.</p>
<p>Or perhaps not. But this ethos of interconnectivity is already reaching the realm of artificial intelligence with Cloud Robotics. These systems allow robots that have been optimised for different tasks to work on specific problems individually, but to pass solutions between each other.</p>
<p>The robots use the cloud to share the data, enabling it to be analysed by any other robot or intelligence system also connected to the same network. One robot teaches something to another, who in turn develops it and passes it forward in a collaborative effort that could massively increase the learning potential and <a href="https://www.roboticsbusinessreview.com/cloud-robotics-will-lead-general-purpose-robots-says-toyotas-kuffner/">connectivity of machines</a>.</p>
<h2>Personal digital assistants</h2>
<p>All of these trends comes together for our final 2017 prediction: the rise of humanised digital technology in the form of intelligent personal assistants. These are essentially human-emulating data hubs. They use advances in artificial intelligence to capture and interpret our data, the Internet of Things to operate everything around us, and the advances in augmented reality to project themselves convincingly into our <a href="https://www.ft.com/content/4f2f97ea-b8ec-11e4-b8e6-00144feab7de">mobile world</a>.</p>
<p>This will provide a single, naturalistic interface between us and our digitally connected universe. It is the next iterative step for the likes of Siri, Cortana and Alexa: an intelligent assistant able to travel with us wherever we go, across every device we use, to assist us in nearly every aspect of our lives.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/70540/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Tom Garner does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>This will be the year when the Internet of Things becomes intelligent – and useful.Tom Garner, Research Fellow, School of Creative Technologies, University of PortsmouthLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.