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

621–630 of 1001 posts

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

#621

Post by XorNot »

skerit wrote: post #325
Sophira wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nah, you're not crazy. I'm also someone who actually reads terms documents, because I find that they're often the only thing that will be truthful about a company's intentions. And keeping it completely disconnected from the internet should be the default, in my opinion.

I never understood why any of the smartness had to be built into the TV in the first place. Sure, it's useful for the first year, and then the seriously underpowered hardware they installed into it will have trouble with just about anything. I bought a Philips Ambilight OLED TV probably over 8 years now. Brilliant tv, great quality, I still see no reason to replace it at all. But its built in AndroidTV is garbage.

Because having the TV play from streaming apps out of the box is pretty useful.

The problem is we've not enforced any strong regulation against ads, downgrade rights or hack ability.

I don't need "better performance" from the system built into my TV I just need it to run Kodi.

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

#622

Post by gorbachev »

ticulatedspline wrote: post #523

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.

I bet there are an army of lawyers in those states preparing class action lawsuits right now.

I'm pretty sure Attorney Generals will also join the fray in due time.

This crap needs to be shut down hard.

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

#623

Post by washelterskelte »

likeclockwork wrote: post #519
ryandrake wrote: post #431

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Flogging or prison time for whoever has the highest salary.

Why not both?

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

#624

Post by throw-qqqqq »

andrepd wrote: post #581
EA-3167 wrote: post #540

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…

My building’s group is on FB. I’ve managed without access for over a decade.

I live a somewhat normal adult life and manage without having anything to do with Meta ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ I probably miss out on some things, but I don’t notice.

All my friends just contact me through other sources.

If you have kids, it’s more difficult - I can acknowledge that.

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

#625

Post by JoshTriplett »

adamm255 wrote: post #607
Brosper wrote: post #571

We should start a movement #NoSmartDevice We have sugar-free, lactose free I want Smart free devices!!!

They’d be like yeah no problem. TV with smart features: $999. TV without smart features: $1,200

Excellent. Sign me up, instantly. Would buy on launch day.

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

#626

Post by lazide »

MetaWhirledPeas wrote: post #604
phony-account wrote: post #588

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

why would it do that?

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

#627

Post by Glyptodon »

MetaWhirledPeas wrote: post #604
phony-account wrote: post #588

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

[flagged]

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

#628

Post by bjt »

empyrrhicist wrote: post #605
Animats wrote: post #570

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)

These (and other TOS agreements) fall under the category of "adhesion contracts".

Because the buyer has no real ability to negotiate, any ambiguity is resolved in their favor. A judge can also strike provisions that a reasonable buyer would not expect, or that are unconscionable. So it's up to the judge's judgment.

https://www.investopedia.com/terms/a/adhesion-contract.asp

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

#629

Post by lazide »

brookst wrote: post #312
otikik wrote: post #268

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well that is how Airtags work. Any iphone/ipad/mac nearby will act as a router for them[1] Given that we have already established that LG is a shady company, I wouldn't put it beyond them to try to use the same trick. [1] https://lifehacker.com/tech/how-apple-airtags-actually-work

That is not how AirTags work. They do not reach out to Apple servers at all. AirTags broadcast an encrypted ID. Phones build lists of ID’s they’ve seen and send the list to Apple. There is no routing, no ability to send arbitrary data, no active communication of any sort. It’s not a mesh network. The link you posted makes that pretty clear.

uh, that is just all the iphones acting as a mesh network for airtag ID’s?

it means you can’t block the tracking by doing anything yourself - you’d also need to block everyone else’s devices too.

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

#630

Post by Glyptodon »

If we aren't there already we're well on our way to a bizarre dystopia where our own internet subscriptions somehow cost more than our devices, which somehow generate enough money for their makers to justify embedding wireless modems for constant surveillance. If you buys a device at loss, for them spend a monthly fee to give it access to spy on you, because the data is so valuable, what on earth are they using it for? Or is everyone losing money?
Post reply on HN