But it's not audio recording. It's a text (which is obtained from an audio by a not so accurate system and thus not admissible in court).
It's not a crime if you do it with AI.
They're still recording everywhere and sending a transcription to iCloud and they're doing it without consent.
This has the same vibes as those Meta glasses. It's something that people will force on others.
Plenty of jurisdictions are single consent.
Moreover, what is the difference with using your phone to record?
You have no expectation of privacy next to another human in public places.
Human memory is well known to be unreliable. There’s a clear difference with “he said, she said” type recollections and what Apple is doing. People forget things and they get things wrong.
There may indeed be no expectation of privacy in public but this still really creepy and slightly threatening.
It’s always listening and allows you to go back without pressing record before hand.
Now you have a potential written record of every off colour remark, joke and personal discussion you over hear.
Maybe you think the world would be better if we all watch what we say in public further, I don’t.
The recording doesn’t have to be audio to violate the Federal Wiretap Act.
Otherwise, manufacturers of digital voice recorders, etc., would also be fearful.
PA has very strict two party consent wiretap laws I'm not sure this feature would clear.
Just the output of what the AI thinks was in the audio
Also Android has had shazam style always on music recognition for years now with no issues, this isn’t that different
It's entirely different. One is fingerprinting ambient audio against a corpus of known signatures to identify music, another is basically silently monitoring and summarizing every conversation it hears for later review.
I don't feel like my privacy is being invaded by a date's phone telling them what song was playing at the restaurant, but I would be disturbed if their phone produced a summary of our conversation, especially if any vulnerable topics came up.