Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

216M Spy TVs – The LG Smart TV Problem [video]

youtube.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

531–540 of 1001 posts

Re: 216M Spy TVs – The LG Smart TV Problem [video]

#531

Post by Lerc »

korzinka wrote: post #107

I've bought an LG Smart TV 5 years ago, read t&c where I was supposed to grant them any data they wanted, decided to disagree and kept all network functions disabled. I was ridiculed by my friends for that. At some point, I thought - maybe I'm really crazy to do so? Who am I, a caveman, a luddite? Oh well, I'm not. Not a bad tv though, many HDMI ports!

I had a similar experience regarding Facebook. People would always remark that they thought someone who knew about tech would surely have an account.

People don't say that so much anymore.

It's worth remembering that for all the animosity they face, they did what they told you they were going to do when they asked for your permission to do it.

Re: 216M Spy TVs – The LG Smart TV Problem [video]

#533

Post by m3047 »

rcarmo wrote: post #262
soleveloper wrote: post #247

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is there a list of all LG tracking services and external DNS endpoints? I'd just block them - and keep local streaming and remote control working edit: just found out WebOS doesn't support DoH/DoT so nextdns won't work. I wonder if one of the public dns providers got LG blocklisted natively with specific IP

Oh, by the way, these things spoof MAC addresses too, so you can't rely on DHCP.

You can spoof MACs all you want, but your MAC is tied to the address I give out. What happens if you spoof addresses? FAFO...

Re: 216M Spy TVs – The LG Smart TV Problem [video]

#534

Post by opello »

ProllyInfamous wrote: post #458
newsoftheday wrote: post #372

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We replaced our old TV recently with an LG and are really liking it. We do not let it on our network though and keep networking functionality disabled. It's basically a monitor for our Kubuntu Linux laptop sitting behind it. We stream with Chrome and use a mouse and the TV remote for audio. Once in a while we actually watch something on TV itself too. It'd be nice I guess if the built in TV app had DVR but if it does…

I'm still nervously holding my breath for the first disclosure that a TV manufacturer is using Amazon's distributed Sidewalk Network (or perhaps mobile vehicles, cell-SIMs, LoRa) to remotely gather all that viewing data they've subsidized into your artificially-low TV purchase price . But they've been calling "crazy?" for decades.

This exactly. Surely some sort of IoT mesh networking will allow exfiltration of data even without having configured your own device.

I'm hopeful that there will be sufficient distrust that "jailbreaking" or "rooting" TV controller boards will be turnkey enough to move to something like OpenWrt or GrapheneOS but for TVs.

Re: 216M Spy TVs – The LG Smart TV Problem [video]

#535

Post by herpdyderp »

delecti wrote: post #430
noir_lord wrote: post #398

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Works til they put a 5g modem in the damn things. My Samsung asked for internet access and I just laughed and said nope. It exists to displays pixels from a Linux box, utterly sick of living in a world where "is my TV manufacturer bugging our house?" Is a thing anyone has to ask.

> Works til they put a 5g modem in the damn things. Okay, but it does work until then. "Things could change in the future" is definitionally true. Never connect the TV in the first place, and you don't need to physically alter the hardware, firmware, or TOS agreements.

How do we know that they're not already putting 5G modems in them?

Re: 216M Spy TVs – The LG Smart TV Problem [video]

#536

Post by Lerc »

josuepeq wrote: post #435
korzinka wrote: post #107

I've bought an LG Smart TV 5 years ago, read t&c where I was supposed to grant them any data they wanted, decided to disagree and kept all network functions disabled. I was ridiculed by my friends for that. At some point, I thought - maybe I'm really crazy to do so? Who am I, a caveman, a luddite? Oh well, I'm not. Not a bad tv though, many HDMI ports!

It’s okay to be a luddite. Not everything needs to have an interface. Got into a spat with a manager at my apartment complex because I refused to install their app just to deal with a maintenance issue. He was like, “I don’t see the problem, you have to use the Latch app to open your apartment door.” To which I replied, “No, I have the door keypad code memorized.” Just like I don’t need an app to make a log of exit/e…

It's not about being a luddite. In many respects I consider it the opposite. It's engaging with technology in a way that demands standards of behaviour and performance.

I don't want the new thing because it is the new thing. I want new things that are better.

People accept abusive technology because they consider that's just the way it is with this new thing. It's a failure to understand what should be considered unacceptable.

Re: 216M Spy TVs – The LG Smart TV Problem [video]

#537

Post by ieee2 »

korzinka wrote: post #107

I've bought an LG Smart TV 5 years ago, read t&c where I was supposed to grant them any data they wanted, decided to disagree and kept all network functions disabled. I was ridiculed by my friends for that. At some point, I thought - maybe I'm really crazy to do so? Who am I, a caveman, a luddite? Oh well, I'm not. Not a bad tv though, many HDMI ports!

Just thinking, if this is an issue, how you can dare to buy a modern car with embedded SIM card and GPS? :)

Re: 216M Spy TVs – The LG Smart TV Problem [video]

#538

Post by JoshTriplett »

patrakov wrote: post #303
JoshTriplett wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That would be lovely. Unfortunately, to the best of my knowledge, nobody sells (for instance) high-quality 65"+ OLED non-"smart" TVs. "dumb TV" options are limited to older display technology.

Try https://www.aorus.com/monitors/AORUS-FO48U/Key-Features - yes, it's a bit too small for you.

Literally my current computer monitor, but no, does not work as a living room TV. (Also, would not recommend as a monitor; aggressive ABL and persistent messages about turning off for maintenance.)

When I said 55+ I was talking about the whole size category larger than that, including 65, 77, etc.

Re: 216M Spy TVs – The LG Smart TV Problem [video]

#539

Post by mey »

ticulatedspline wrote: post #525

I'm surprised this hasn't run afoul of all-party wiretap laws. Even if you could waive your own rights via ToS other people in the house may not have agreed. Theoretically I could see LG or even the TV's owner being culpable. I'd love to see that case hit the media. Average citizen jailed over wiretap violations because they let their TV record a guest.

How do guests/children/people in public spaces consent to it? It's a gross violation.

Re: 216M Spy TVs – The LG Smart TV Problem [video]

#540

Post by washelterskelte »

hvb2 wrote: post #491
kolinko wrote: post #395

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Depends on jurisdiction, just because someone wrote something in a contract doesn’t mean it’s binding. In Poland/EU we have an (ever growing) list of forbidden clauses that even when written and signed by consumer are null and void. And I think these can be enacted retroactively - when corporations invent new shady clauses, government steps in and tells them these are invalid. This helps to even out the consumer-corp…

> we have an (ever growing) list of forbidden clauses that even when written and signed by consumer are null and void I'm pretty sure that's true almost everywhere. Law beats contract. The real question is how strong the laws are. In the US not so much because of small government and stuff, especially in red states.

The law matters very little when enforcing it in court often means a multiyear lawsuit against an opponent which employs an army of attorneys, has effectively unlimited amounts of money, will likely cost you ruinious sums of money, and for an outcome that's far from guaranteed.
Post reply on HN