Several media outlets have reported on an unusual and
potentially groundbreaking murder case in Arkansas
Thirty-one year-old James Bates invited a couple of buddies
to his Bentonville house in November 2015 for beer and to watch some college
football on television. At some point
they decided to soak in Bates’ hot tub.
Bates said he went to bed around 1 a.m. but awoke the next morning to
find one of the two friends dead, floating face-down in the hot tub.
Bates was charged with murder, but his defense attorney
argues that the death was a tragic accident.
She points to the victim’s blood alcohol level that was four times the
legal limit to drive in the state. But
the Benton County
Sad story, but fairly routine stuff, as murder cases
go. What is unusual is the witness that
the prosecution wants to subpoena. I’m
guessing you have at least a passing acquaintance with her:
Meet Alexa, the voice control system of Amazon’s Echo smart
speaker.
This voice-activated device can answer users’ questions,
play music, give directions, read the news aloud, connect to other smart devices,
and much more. Police learned that Bates
had such a device in his home and was heard to be streaming music on it the
evening of the murder. Now they want to
examine it for any pertinent evidence it might have collected.
My thoughts immediately went to George Orwell’s chilling
novel, Nineteen Eighty-Four, and the
omnipresent “telescreens” it depicted that enabled the totalitarian government
(“Big Brother”) to hear and see all. We
are told that Alexa and similar devices are only activated when their name or
some other verbal cue is spoken. Then
the requests made of the device are filtered through a speech recognition
system in Amazon’s cloud servers so an appropriate response can be sent back to
the device to carry out the request. As
far as I know, Amazon has no stated policy on how long this voice data is
retained. And can we be sure Alexa is
not eavesdropping and recording when we haven’t
spoken her name? And if it doesn’t now,
will that always be the case?
But Alexa, it is argued by her fans, is so convenient to
have around and makes life so much easier.
And that brings to mind a survey I read about a few weeks ago. Mintel, a global research firm based in London
Whether we think about it or not, we all are selling our
information. I really don’t care if the
grocery store uses my rewards card to learn that I buy blueberries every week;
I like getting the lower prices to which the card entitles me. But what information would I rather they did
NOT track? And signing up for a new
store credit card and getting 20% your in-store shopping that day in exchange? Would you jeopardize your credit score and
add another temptation to spend just to save a few bucks on one day’s shopping?
What are we willing to sell, and at what price? WE become the product when another party
gives us something for “free”. Freedom
is usually taken piecemeal, not whole.
Are we giving up little bits of freedom for convenience? For money?
Is there a line we tell ourselves we would not cross? Will we hold that line if everyone around us
has sold out to have the latest gadget in their homes?
The wrangling over what Alexa may or may not offer up as
evidence will be closely watched in legal circles. Amazon is loath to assist the state, citing
privacy rights. Legal experts point out
that the right to privacy is not absolute and may be breached—with cause and
the proper search warrants—in a case such as this.
But in the end, Alexa may not be the star witness and may
not be what exonerates or convicts Bates.
It turns out Mr. Bates’ house is a “smart” house, with several “smart”
devices, including his water meter. And
the meter showed that around 2 a.m. on the night of the murder someone at the
house used a very large quantity of water—as if cleaning up a mess such as,
say, a murder scene.
Outsmarted by a water heater.
Until next time,
Roger
Until next time,
Roger
"What shall a man give in exchange for his soul?" Matthew 16:26b KJV
No comments:
Post a Comment