alt Hacker NewsWith cloud based inference we agree, this being just one more benefit of doing everything with "edge" inference (on device inside the home) as we do with Juno.
With cloud based inference we agree, this being just one more benefit of doing everything with "edge" inference (on device inside the home) as we do with Juno.
Pretty sure a) it's not a matter of whether you agree and b) GDPR still considers always-on listening to be something the affected user has to actively consent to. Since someone in a household may not realize that another person's device is "always on" and may even lack the ability to consent - such as a child - you are probably going to find that it is patently illegal according to both the letter and the spirit of the law.
Is your argument that these affected parties are not users and that the GDPR does not require their consent?
Don't take this as hostility. I am 100% for local inference. But that is the way I understand the law, and I do think it benefits us to hold companies to a high standard. Because even such a device could theoretically be used against a person, or could have other unintended consequences.