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

811–820 of 1001 posts

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

#811

Post by bbor »

adithyassekhar wrote: post #784

> They also found where the microphone was software disabled via settings, it was STILL recording things but had the dB level so low that it looked like nothing but when amplified to +50dB later the conversations were actually still there.

Can someone confirm this part of it? I'm highly, highly dubious that these TVs are sending back random ambient conversation -- for one thing, it would be a truly monstrously-huge stream of data, no?

I certainly believe that it sends back data when you use voice commands, ofc (both for advertising and product improvement). But this would be the first real case of something that's been a 100% false conspiracy theory for over a decade, which feels... unlikely. Kinda like someone finding a Sasquatch.

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

#812

Post by fwip »

lrvick wrote: post #782
soared wrote: post #762

Earlier quoted context omitted.

TVs have streaming services, those need internet to function. What else does anyone (average consumer) use their TV for? I don’t want a separate device to plug in and remote just to stream things.

But surely you know the TV will have ads, and spyware and screenshots you every few seconds to send to manufactures, and in some cases even has microphones involved? The apps built into the screen literally meet the definition of trojans which any casual search on most brands would tell you. All avoidable by plugging in an $20 dedicated source device for streaming or whatever. Is saving the $20 really worth it?

Genuine question - are there any $20 streaming sticks that don't put their own advertisements in?

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

#814

Post by gruez »

digi59404 wrote: post #800
gruez wrote: post #775

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>and it will connect to any open WiFi I've seen this claim made over and over again for various smart TVs, but so far I haven't seen any concrete evidence of this, only random speculation.

I have a Samsung fridge. It’s not a smart fridge, it doesn’t have a screen, bluetooth, or any way to connect to it. I logged into my UniFi stack to monitor devices and it showed up. It had gotten the connection details from my wife’s phone, the other Samsung device and was transmitting data back to Google and Samsung.

The far more likely explanation is that your unifi dashboard's device identification logic is broken and is misreporting the device. Otherwise it doesn't make sense for samsung to engage it a massive conspiracy of putting wifi hardware in non-smart devices (driving up the BOM cost), creating a massive botnet that can share credentials between devices, all so they can... maybe run a residential proxy network? Then subsequently detected by anyone who looks at their device list.

Even if you think they're running some sort of massive botnet, the fridge being part of it is still implausible. They probably have billions of phones and tablets alone, plenty enough to scrape/DDoS the entire internet several times over. There's no need to add clandestine hardware into non-smart fridges.

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

#815

Post by drdexebtjl »

fluidcruft wrote: post #783
soared wrote: post #762

Earlier quoted context omitted.

TVs have streaming services, those need internet to function. What else does anyone (average consumer) use their TV for? I don’t want a separate device to plug in and remote just to stream things.

Isn't that what a streaming stick is for? Who needs those complex TV remotes anyway. I've been running on Roku remotes for years and haven't missed anything. Even TiVo remotes are too complex.

Streaming sticks also collect your data. Roku does ACR unless you opt out.

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

#816

Post by anonymousiam »

I've got a 65" LG C2 OLED TV (from 2022) that I hacked with https://rootmy.tv shortly after I purchased it (and before LG updated the firmware to prevent the hack).

It seems pretty safe. When it's on, I can ssh into it. When it's off, it doesn't reply to ICMP pings, and doesn't appear to be using much power.

I guess the newer LG TVs have gone to shit.

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

#817

Post by jcranmer »

johnecheck wrote: post #809
bbor wrote: post #806

Earlier quoted context omitted.

\#BanAdvertising, my friends. It sounds absurd until you think about it for a minute. If billboards and vice ads and this sort of monitoring should be banned, shouldn't it all?

How much time, money, and human effort has been spent on the Pepsi/coke advertising arms race? All for what? To maintain the same market share they've had since the 80s? What a waste.

I have yet to find a graph that shows the market share all the way back to the 1980s, but the market share isn't stagnant--Pepsi's market share has dramatically fallen (about half since 2000), while Coke's share has been pretty stable, although declining somewhat. Pepsi is no longer the second largest soft drink--it was very recently eclipsed by Dr. Pepper.

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

#818

Post by bbor »

idiotsecant wrote: post #808
bbor wrote: post #806

Earlier quoted context omitted.

\#BanAdvertising, my friends. It sounds absurd until you think about it for a minute. If billboards and vice ads and this sort of monitoring should be banned, shouldn't it all?

All advertisement is psychological warfare. It's designed to reprogram you to do things you otherwise wouldn't do.

Wow two amazing replies within seconds! But this is the part that gets me. It's manipulation. That's not an accusation, that's a plain, unbiased description of what it is: you don't want something, then you see an ad, then you do.

Also taking this moment to head off two common responses, for ettiquette's sake:

1. The alternative is catalogs! Products are listed accurately and thoroughly, and we deal with edge cases as needed. This is especially tractable in the internet age, of course. See: [the Wells-Fargo Wagon](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fP0E1tbfi2g)

2. Yes, you are affected by advertisements. I don't care who you are: if you're on HackerNews from anywhere other than shack in rural Montana, you are affected by advertisments. Many (most?) ad spend is on "brand advertising", which isn't trying to get you to take any conscious action at all -- it's swaying your subconscious.

This sorta feels like the problem with "rent fixing" via algorithms from a few years back. The system has been bumbling along fine enough for a while, but the arrival of mass computing makes these tactics so insanely effective that they become unfair.

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

#819

Post by stronglikedan »

lanerobertlane wrote: post #647
Animats wrote: post #567

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…

tempted to go into my nearest big box electronics store and then sue them when they don't tell me the LG tv's they have on display are eavesdropping on me.

they already have audio video surveillance signs posted everywhere from the moment you walk in so that would go over like a lead balloon

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

#820

Post by bogdan »

lrvick wrote: post #799
zapzupnz wrote: post #794

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But surely you know No? It's hardly written in the advertising copy for the TV, is it. This is a technical website with technical users. You are failing to put yourself in the shoes of non-technical, ordinary users who just want to watch Netflix. > All avoidable If you know that you should avoid it but people don't.

> No? It's hardly written in the advertising copy for the TV, is it. Which just proves almost no one does 5 minutes of online research before blindly believing whatever a device says about itself. Those sorts are unfortunately in for a very bad time over the next few years.

A nutritionist, a dermatologist, a plumber could all say the same about many of the things we do or don't do day to day. There's only so many free "5 minutes" people have in a day.
Post reply on HN