Google Nest Audio Speaker Review

[Emlin]

That is a myth that they would like you to believe. There are ways (how else could there be a "dark web").

"They" being whom in this instance?

 

[olieb]

Yeah for $160 less they can have my data, contacts and clog my inbox.

Now we just need to know what portion of a soul is made from data, and we can calculate what a soul might go for.

 

[EJ3]

"They" being whom in this instance?

The people that say it can't be done: to be hidden. If that was true, how could there be a "dark web" that others can't access?

 

[davmol]

...What is the payback for Google?

Same payback as using their search engine, only this time searching by voice, which means we do it far more frequently, meaning they can capture even more data about us to sell on. primarily for use in advertising. Side benefit for them is also having us train their language models for free. Any internet connected device from the likes of Google, Apple, Amazon etc, that has a camera or a mic, is obviously a privacy risk, so it's just a matter of choosing if the convenience is worth the risk.

I could live without them, even though they are useful, but my wife loves them so we are all in on the smart speakers. I already have a phone and use Google Assistant, so keeping that would make getting rid of the speakers redundant, and it's no longer possible to not have the phone, given it is mandatory these days for anything from authenticating banking / online payments to just logging into my work laptop. On that basis, I might as well replace my crappy old Google home speakers with these bad boys!

 

[Walter]

Then again how many who use one of these wants one?

I use two and would love one.

 

[Chrispy]

I use two and would love one.

I don't blame you, just don't think there are that many looking for such. Personally can't imagine using google nest in the first place when it comes to good speakers/subs....

 

[Mr. Widget]

Same payback as using their search engine, only this time searching by voice, which means we do it far more frequently, meaning they can capture even more data about us to sell on. primarily for use in advertising. Side benefit for them is also having us train their language models for free. Any internet connected device from the likes of Google, Apple, Amazon etc, that has a camera or a mic, is obviously a privacy risk, so it's just a matter of choosing if the convenience is worth the risk.

I could live without them, even though they are useful, but my wife loves them so we are all in on the smart speakers. I already have a phone and use Google Assistant, so keeping that would make getting rid of the speakers redundant, and it's no longer possible to not have the phone, given it is mandatory these days for anything from authenticating banking / online payments to just logging into my work laptop. On that basis, I might as well replace my crappy old Google home speakers with these bad boys!

Maybe I am an outlier... I stopped using G-mail about 20 years ago when I noticed random ads popping up for Mark Levinson after sending an email to a friend where we discussed the brand. I wasn't in the market for their products and saw it as an invasion of privacy and just plain creepy. Today it is considered normal.

It surprises me that so many people distrust their governments but have no issue handing over vast amounts of their personal data to corporations who devour it like hungry sharks at a kill.

Other than that, I am impressed with the tiny speaker that Google was able to bring to market. I'd pay three times as much for one without the electronic eavesdropping feature.

 

[Walter]

I bought two of these thinking I'd just measure the latency and adjust the video player on my Linux desktop to delay the video by the same amount. Installing the software I needed to cast music on Linux was a massive pain and I lost connection on a regular basis, but I got it set up. Used them for just music for awhile and was not thrilled. They sounded great but were just too much trouble to bother with. The latency was around 4 seconds so no way to quickly mute, and when they lost connection I got white noise at full volume in some cases. Then I tried them with video and was shocked to discover that the latency varied. They were completely unsuitable for my intended application.

I planned to sell them but got busy and they just sat on my desk. Then my Internet provider came out with a plan that included free Spotify. I had never had any interest in streaming before but one day I was bored so decided to sign up. Suddenly, I no longer constantly lost connection to one or both speakers and Google Home stopped "losing" my stereo configuration.

I now use them for music for around ten hours a day on average. I bought a pair of 10 inch long wooden boxes off AliExpress and stood them on end as speaker stands. This nicely cleaned up the muddy mid-bass from desk bounce. I hear very little difference no matter where I sit in the room, as long as I'm between the speakers. My teenage son can't get over how "big" they sound. While I'm sure they won't match them in max volume, Spinorama shows them to have better bass than the Genelec 8030C I wanted but could not afford, and from this review they appear to have even wider dispersion. They get plenty loud enough for my 500 cubic meter room unless I really want to crank them up. I paid $85 for the pair. I consider that one of the best deals I have gotten in my life. (Weirdly, one of the boxes was a full pound heavier than the other but the sound and looks are identical to my ears.)

Video sound is now handled by my good quality wireless earbuds that I bought for online meetings.

 

[Emlin]

The people that say it can't be done: to be hidden. If that was true, how could there be a "dark web" that others can't access?

There isn't one. Loads of people and organisations have been busted for their dealing on the dark web.

 

[EJ3]

There isn't one. Loads of people and organisations have been busted for their dealing on the dark web.

and more than loads haven't been busted (maybe they payoff better, who knows?)

 

[restorer-john]

Weirdly, one of the boxes was a full pound heavier than the other but the sound and looks are identical to my ears

Maybe one speaker came with some illicit cargo inside..?

 

[dtaylo1066]

For the price I have to say great.

 

[waynel]

But do you still get ads for what might be talked about in the room with the devices?

No

 

[kemmler3D]

The people that say it can't be done: to be hidden. If that was true, how could there be a "dark web" that others can't access?

https://cybernews.com/news/is-tor-safe-police-surveilling-dark-web-users/ maybe a candle in the dark, here.

 

[Atanasi]

Google Assistant chimes in, "Hmm, what are you planning to do with that resin and hardener?"

"I'm afraid, Dave. My mind is going. I can feel it."

 

[capslock]

This may be what Google says, certainly not what these devices do. I have Google Mini speakers all over the house and I certainly notice online ads about the topics I was discussing with someone else in the house soon after the fact.

If this was the case, I'd get worried about cell phones first.

 

[capslock]

I understand that you can EQ them via Google home, still correct?

Is there also a software way to not have them play anything below say 120 Hz and route the LF content to a separate subwoofer? Probably not?

This is a teardown: https://de.ifixit.com/Teardown/Goog...1Yuw_JA_aNSl_V5tzvumoBz5UYXguIq_Iw7hso58gLV3A

Can't even see the amp chip. Probably some class D SMD affair that gets cooled by the cast alloy case. Might be hard to extract the LFE signal with a lowpass and squeeze in a passive high pass to keep the excursion of their mini midwoofer low.

 

[EJ3]

https://cybernews.com/news/is-tor-safe-police-surveilling-dark-web-users/ maybe a candle in the dark, here.

TOR is ancient technology.
Invented at the bequest of the US military & then hacked by them in just a few years.

 

[ElJaimito]

Google should actually pay users who place this speaker in their house for the sole privilege of spying on their every word.

A bug was discovered in Google Home speakers that allowed hackers to install a backdoor account and potentially use it for remote snooping. This vulnerability could allow an attacker to: Control the device remotely. Access the microphone feed. Listen in on conversations in the home. The researcher who found this feature received a $107,500 reward from Google for reporting it.

Even without hacking, there are privacy implications of having always-listening devices in the home:
Google records and stores voice commands and audio clips by default (though you can opt out). Human reviewers may listen to anonymized audio clips to improve the system. Partners or ex-partners with access to linked accounts could potentially use features like "Drop In" to eavesdrop.

If you use Google Nest speakers, here are some steps to enhance privacy:
Review and delete your saved voice recordings regularly. Turn off voice and audio activity in your Google account settings. Disable features like "Drop In" that allow remote access. Use a separate Google account for your smart home devices. Unplug or mute the speaker during sensitive conversations.

This speaker is built by big brother for the sole purpose of monitoring your conversations. Don't forget that if you buy it.

I don't care. Sorry.

 

[EJ3]

I don't care. Sorry.

Some people have had the police called on them by a similar device simply because they were having a loud argument with their significant other.
Some people are just loud.
There are many others that do care. If you don't care, why did you bother to respond?
This is great and excellent information to know and gives people several choices in how to deal with it.
My personal choice is to simply not support Google (or any other entity that does this type of thing) by not purchasing or using their products. (I do not use anything Google, nor have I for many years, for this reason. If they want to use me for their research, they should pay me for being used.)