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

601–610 of 1001 posts

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

#601

Post by hdgvhicv »

jeffbee wrote: post #565
mey wrote: post #539

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

Of what? This can only be evaluated in the context of wherever you live. In most of America recording sounds "in public" is a broadly protected activity because that's what "in public" means. You can only get in trouble for this if you violate another person's reasonable expectation of privacy.

Watching a TV that doesn’t watch you back is a reasonable expectation of privacy, and has been since 1984 was written.

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

#602

Post by hdgvhicv »

ryandrake wrote: post #433
account42 wrote: post #362

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's exactly why this keeps happening. If I bug your house I'd be charged with all kinds of crimes. If LG does it at scale nothing happens.

We need to climb two very difficult hills for there to be any change here: 1. We need our governments to actually start charging companies with crimes, when what they are doing would be illegal for an individual to do, and 2. We need the penalties to be something other than fines, which are ultimately treated by companies as routine costs of business.

If the fine is higher than the revenue they get from it then that would presumably work.

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

#603

Post by daemin »

FractalParadigm wrote: post #574
godelski wrote: post #541

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On top of that, the first few minutes of the video suggests it captures your neighbors' device and IP information. I'm sure the ToS has some BS about you being required to inform any guests, but what if your TV is just recording your neighbors because they are close enough? Just wait, I'm sure the "solution" will be that TVs start displaying reminders that you're being recorded... Is our inability to innovate in tech…

Re. The last paragraph, that's what confuses me the most about all of this. LG has virtually held a monopoly of the entire OLED TV market for the past ~15 years, selling (arguably) one of the TVs on the market and being the only thing I've recommended people buy in about as long. They could have done literally nothing but update the hardware every other year with a newer SoC, HDMI version, etc. and done just fine. No…

For a corporation there's always more money to be made, until it makes all the money in the world.

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

#604

Post by EA-3167 »

andrepd wrote: post #583
EA-3167 wrote: post #542

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Same here when they find out I’ve never had an FB/IG/X etc account. As though having that crap in your life is somehow mandatory. People who make poor choices love to pretend that they had no choice at all.

1. Interaction with Meta is virtually mandatory in many places in the world. Try opting out of Meta when your kid's daycare or your building's group chat is on whatsapp. 2. It doesn't really matter if you opt out, because _other people around you don't_: they take pictures in which you show, they tag you, they talk about you, they send you links, etc. Which means they (Meta) build a shadow profile of you anyway. The…

You’re assuming that my primary concern is my privacy rather than my sanity. I don’t understand how anyone can seek out a non-stop feed of the sort of people who routinely post on FB. I’ve seen exactly what the doom scroll does to people without them realizing it.

So yeah if a business requires me to have an account I’ll find a different business to patronize. Frankly if you’re expecting someone other than you to take responsibility for the media you consume, that’s a problem.

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

#605

Post by Obscurity4340 »

Animats wrote: post #572

Here are LG's contract terms for appliances.[1] They are awful. Not only can they listen in. You have a contractual requirement to tell everyone in range of an appliance that they may be eavesdropped upon. CONSENT REQUIREMENT: You acknowledge and agree that it is your sole responsibility to obtain all necessary consents from any third parties whose voices may be captured by the Product and to notify household members…

Can you actually even turn and keep the microphone off or does it toggle itself back on like Apple's Wifi and Bluetooth one-touch toggle off for now buttons?

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

#606

Post by MetaWhirledPeas »

phony-account wrote: post #590
Animats wrote: post #572

Here are LG's contract terms for appliances.[1] They are awful. Not only can they listen in. You have a contractual requirement to tell everyone in range of an appliance that they may be eavesdropped upon. CONSENT REQUIREMENT: You acknowledge and agree that it is your sole responsibility to obtain all necessary consents from any third parties whose voices may be captured by the Product and to notify household members…

And yet what lawmakers focused on was getting your consent for a cookie on a website you were only going to visit once.

The law has been unable to keep up with tech changes. Let's hope for the irony of AI helping them figure this stuff out.

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

#607

Post by empyrrhicist »

Animats wrote: post #572

Here are LG's contract terms for appliances.[1] They are awful. Not only can they listen in. You have a contractual requirement to tell everyone in range of an appliance that they may be eavesdropped upon. CONSENT REQUIREMENT: You acknowledge and agree that it is your sole responsibility to obtain all necessary consents from any third parties whose voices may be captured by the Product and to notify household members…

Can that kind of clause really be enforceable? It really doesn't seem legal in any jurisdiction I'm aware of. (not a lawyer)

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

#608

Post by tosti »

frantathefranta wrote: post #432
ungreased0675 wrote: post #396

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would like to send vast amounts of garbage data to the LG servers. They aren’t being respectful of our bandwidth and data, we don’t need to be respectful of theirs. This also applies incentives in the correct direction. Their database of customer information becomes less valuable if there’s bad information in it. Disconnecting your TV from the internet doesn’t affect LG, feeding them bad data does.

How do you go about generating the garbage data? Bunch of ESP32s with rngs in the same subnet?

Always speak in Klingon within hearing range of the TV. Qapla'!

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

#610

Post by daemin »

ryandrake wrote: post #433
account42 wrote: post #362

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's exactly why this keeps happening. If I bug your house I'd be charged with all kinds of crimes. If LG does it at scale nothing happens.

We need to climb two very difficult hills for there to be any change here: 1. We need our governments to actually start charging companies with crimes, when what they are doing would be illegal for an individual to do, and 2. We need the penalties to be something other than fines, which are ultimately treated by companies as routine costs of business.

Simplest thing to say is: find all the people responsible for this, from the bottom to the top, and charge them with the same crime as an individual would be. I would include everyone in the chain from the programmers that implemented it, to the VP that authorised it, and finally to the CEO because all responsibility ends with them (that's why they get paid the big bucks right?).

I'd like to say look at Volkswagen for an example but I don't know if all the necessary people were charged.

Post reply on HN