Everyone is entitled to their own opinion... not their own facts.

Posting biased assumptions as if they are fact is just as dishonest as you claim these companies to be.

Hell, the very article you linked in your OP even admits it... "So while some of this hysteria over what's being collected probably veers into hyperbole territory..."

And that's exactly what I see going on in this thread. Mass hysteria over a product that A: hasn't even been released yet (and is still being labeled an inherently bad idea by some people in this community) and B: will likely never have any affect on your life anyway.

As I said in my first post... much ado about nothing. 

@ Kevin_Walter...

Given all your posts in this thread, it seems you just want to be argumentative: hence, though I have thoughts on how your replies disregarded the meaning of the comments in my previous post, I shall not respond directly to them.

However, I will say this!  If you think this kind of technology is 100% safe/harmless, put your money where your mouth is.  Go ahead and have it in your home, then see how comforatable you are discussing private and family matters within 'earshot'.of the devices.... especially when you discover that they can be operated remotely by the manufacturers AND hackers.

Cortana and Barbie will have some interesting conversations while you are asleep.

Hey now.......Cortana is awesome........she runs my life! 

 EDIT:

With regard to the topic.......I have a minor observation...

All tech eventually leads to a crossroads.  To make new tech more desirable/useful you need to make it more accessible.  Making tech 'accessible' however means your security vulnerability exposure grows as well.  Whether it is the tech in our automobiles allowing for more and more 'connectivity' or home security systems with remote access (incl. baby monitors etc.) or smartphone-to-office systems integration, too many of us are still oblivious/ignorant to the correlation created.  The bigger/better friends we become with such 'tech' the bigger/worse enemies such 'tech' present to our privacy and security.

Then again.......as one of my favourite TV personalities (Judge Judy...hehe ) always says:  " Ignorance is not a defense "

Mattel's privacy policy indicates that they share information with their agents and service providers (whatever that means)?

Not everyone has your level of IT knowledge, education and experience kryo...that's the whole point...Grandma sees the Barbie doll she had when her mom gave her one...

The fact is, granny really doesn't know what she's buying, and neither does gramps. They only know the kid/kid's parents told them to pick one up when they asked (in all innocence) "What should I get her? What does she want?".

Be very careful about whom you accuse of dishonesty. Personal attacks are not tolerated here.

The full quote, which you misrepresented by not completing it (in the above) is:

"So while some of this hysteria over what's being collected probably veers into hyperbole territory, the cardboard-grade security and privacy standards most companies are adopting certainly create cause for concern. The good news I suppose: the "smarter" our products get, the bigger the market is for "dumb" products that just sit there and do what they're supposed to do, whether that's a television thatjust displays the damn signal sent to it or utterly insentient dolls that just shut up, smile and drink their fake tea."

The operative word is 'while'.

nor really relate to:

"The problem is, we've seen repeatedly how the companies rushing face-first toward the billions in potential revenues from the "Internet of Things" market are so fixated on profit, that security and privacy have been afterthoughts -- if a thought at all. It doesn't matter if we're talking about Smart TVs with trivial to non-existent security or easily hacked smart car tech, companies are showing again and again that privacy and security really aren't paramount. That's before we even discuss how this collected voice data creates a wonderful new target for nosy governments courtesy of the Third Party Doctrine. "

Part of that profit will undoubtedly be the sale of data harvested without a clear statement of intent.

So basically, you don't wish to actually argue against my points. I wonder why...

Also, your inference that I'm under the impression that any sort of technology is "100% safe" is humorous to me. Mostly because I never said, nor implied it, but also because it goes back to what I've said before about fear mongering. Just because something isn't 100% safe doesn't make it an inherently bad idea or product. Cars are not 100% safe... and yet most people in the US ride in them on a regular basis. Computers aren't 100% safe either, and yet you're still arguing your point from behind one.

Most things in life are not "100% safe", and I'm pretty sure most people would agree with me that not developing something just because it isn't "100% safe" is irrational.

Ignoring (of course) the fact that the lack of a specific warning as to the possibility of eavesdropping, sale of data and recorded/transmitted conversations in the proximity of the doll is unethical, immoral and possibly illegal.

Also ignoring the responsibility of adults (all adults) to protect children and not to place them in jeopardy by business practices driven by other motives.

You appear to be the only one with all the correct answers. First I have and do play some games but they were all paid for. Sure there is some free games available that are fine to play. I referred to FB as I have cleaned my Sisters and several friends computers from FB games and downloaded stuff from it. I don't remember saying everything was bad. You seem to just want to put your know all spin on everything. Enjoy yourself.

As far as imply. I stated facts from experience. You have implied I meant everything. My implications were accurate and again never said it applied to all games or things. I forgot more important things in life then you will ever know about. Please save the World and hurry up doing it.

Oh yes, you may comment on what I just said as I already know what I said is totally wrong with your thinking. Thing is I won't bother with this post anymore so enjoy yourself. One thing I wish is that I had all the answers and knew everything like you do. No because I know it's impossible for anyone to know it all, except for maybe you.

You're correct. The operative word is, in fact "while". Meaning "while I must concede point A is likely true, I would also like to interject that point B is a legitimate point of concern".

This argument (that I admittedly started) is not contending the idea that corporate security is an issue. If you want to argue about that, I'll gladly step aside, as that argument will lead nowhere given the inevitable "shit happens" realization. I'm arguing the point (and have been arguing the point since my first response in this thread), that the fear surrounding this particular product is irrational.

The part that I quoted agrees with that point, to a degree, and the part that comes after in no way invalidates it. Posting the quote in its entirety is unnecessary, and not posting the quote in its entirety is not misrepresentation. 

"Undoubtedly"...

EDIT: You guys seem to be getting way too emotional about this. DrJBHL thinking I'm attacking him personally... DaveBax and that indignant response...

I think I'm done here.

Again, on the former, incorrect. The latter? Not veiled at all: Completely up front. Read the TOS, specifically 3a. I warned you not to do what you clearly did: You impugned my honesty.

Not at all irrational. You are merely being argumentative. The examples of Samsung, etc. were given in the OP and borne out in Mattel's own 'disclaimer' and beyod that share information (no specific limitations) with their "agents and service providers". The info is supposedly sent onward to a data processing firm. That creates an even greater breach in your security.

It is when the violations occur in situations of dishonesty in negotiation (i.e. the act of selling), and illicit intent which if couched in tiny print is no defense for the firm. No one is entitled to violate your 4th Amendment rights without a warrant except in very exigent circumstances...of which the sale of a Barbie Doll isn't one.

Way too far....

Since honesty is a character trait, accusing one of of dishonesty (directly or by innuendo and/or equating the posting to the corporation in question's motives) is de facto an ad hominum attack. Were you to say 'exaggerated' or something akin, that would be a different matter, as would not equating the posts ethics/morals to the corporation in question's.

As for "much ado about nothing"? That's your opinion. I as well as others in this thread remain less than convinced of the purity of Mattel's goals.

As I was reading the O/P yesterday it did cross my mind how what was until very recently indicative of clinical paranoid thinking is now more of an informed observation of fact.  It really is kind of surprising to me how quickly the population moved from respecting and preserving privacy to "Meh, privacy is not as amusing to me."  The population is indeed buying the transition, both figuratively and literally.  It's almost as if no one would ask the very fundamental question:  "Is it really a good idea to have little girls carrying around a doll that transmits audio to the internet?"

I think I like that guy.

1. Fact.  Mattel is intending to release a doll which records a child's conversations.

2. Fact.  A child is not legally [or mentally] competent to distinguish any potential for endangerment from such 'conversation'.

3. Fact.  Parents are NOT universally, absolutely guaranteed to be competent to effectively police and/or protect their children from harm.

4. Fact [apparent].  Mattel has determined that profit via improved market targeting is more valuable to them than a child's privacy.

I can argue facts with the best of them.

The ONLY 'fact' that is a plus for Mattel is that they have NOT YET released the doll.

Now, reference was made to 'shit happens'.

Sometimes it's nice to be able to pre-empt the arrival of new happening shit...and suggest it need not happen.

Re 'Fact 3.' - example...the frequency that sees SUV [4WD] People Movers [in particular] running over their rug-rats in their own driveways.....

Oh, it's OK.

Shit happens.

I'm not sure fear is the right word to describe most responses. I myself am not fearful of this product, I find it incredibly arrogant for a company to presume that collecting data without permission is acceptable. Of course we don't really know how Mattel plans to approach this matter. Children under the age of 13 are suppose to have parental consent to participate.

I am curious why anyone would want to defend such practices but...

Now I'm wondering if I've been misunderstood.  When I said "it's now more of an informed observation of fact", I meant exactly that, there was no sarcasm.  It used to be "crazy" to think there were devices everywhere watching and listening, now it's the truth.

 Personally I'm going to hold out for the "Chucky" doll. It will give me a great opportunity to screw with all the people and companies behind the curtain.

I'll tell you why!  You do nothing but argue and be confrontational, which for me is a complete turn off.   Put bluntly, you are not somebody I wish to converse with.

Now we're done... no further input to you from me, and I shall ignore yours/

lol this thread serves a good example of why in Star Trek Humans (esp. in ENT) are more successful than Vulcans :-))))

pretty sure i read about some kid's toy doing something similar a few months back. beats me what it was though. think i read it around the same time as the tv stuff. maybe it was this?

Welcome to new era... well I read about spying tv's and dolls. But then there is Google, Facebook, Twitter, Instagram social networks that milions are addicted to, they like to post what they do every day.. willingly..

And what about smart phones, browsers, even windows or other OS. You feel safe? You have installed some security software or you are behind a firewall?

Today privacy is a delusion, the only ones who can have real privacy are people away from civilization in the jungle somewhere and some very important and powerful ones who have the ways to create really private rooms..

Personally I have no Facebook I had for a couple yrs to play games nothing else, I always thought as a waste of time and boring. I don't want to make my life public nor I want to use Google products Chrome or being constantly connected to Google or Facebook and have them following me everywhere.

Recently it was revealed Facebook spys on you even if you don't have a profile just with cookies. Either you visit your daily news site or game site facebook is there somewhere to "like"

Devices, machines, toys get smarter and people become nothing but data how to use them for making better promotional campaigns to extort more money.
Everything revolves around money today nothing else is more important but money. Who cares about privacy or human values? Gone out of the window...

And of course date are always available on request by goverment all around the world. It doesn't matter if it's Russia, US, France or some small country. They do know everything about you and me. They create their own profiles about a person and those data are available to use anyway they like. Prohibit you from visiting a country because of something you said a couple years ago? Rejecting you application, or being accepted in a company because you don't "fit". You name it..

Everyone loves technology but we have to be careful with it and how we use it.

On the news I caught last night they told(and showed) you how to turn that off for samsung's, LG's and another TV I don't remember.