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

891–900 of 1001 posts

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

#891

Post by jopsen »

afarah1 wrote: post #307
spockz wrote: post #172

Okay. This is insane. First the monitor that uses a windows feature to automatically install a small helper tool with root permissions and then starts showing adds in certain regions. Now a tv that is actually actively snooping around on top of the known fingerprinting. What else is next? In the previous topic I got ridiculed for not wanting to buy LG anymore because I could use an agent to modify to strip out the of…

I think the insane part is that this is not criminal and the executives are not jailed for it.

Who is to say they won't?

For the record, it's not all the big corps that are this bad.

Many are borderline paranoid about privacy, both for appearance and compliance perspectives.

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

#892

Post by tosti »

mitxela wrote: post #704
tosti wrote: post #586

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You got lucky. If you've got an apartment in, say, a healthcare facility, they'll install those thermostats and whatnot. Usually the neighbours are clueless about technology so complaining doesn't get very far at all. It's even worse if some staff wrote paranoid in your file, 'cause they'll argue it's good for "exposure".

You mean if you are permanently resident in a mental institute they don't let you control the temperature? That's hardly surprising...

Some day, that could be you.

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

#893

Post by malkia »

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…

What about the stores where the TV is sold?

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

#894

Post by chinathrow »

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…

Imagine being the lawyer signing this off. Imagine being the head of product signing this off.

What were they thinking? And most importantly: what TV are they using at home?

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

#896

Post by silon42 »

otikik wrote: post #268
recurseP wrote: post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Really?

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

Forget GPS jammers, everyone needs a bluetooth jammer.

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

#897

Post by daemin »

godelski wrote: post #683
daemin wrote: post #603

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

You seem to be making the assumption that this is all a zero sum game. I have to point out the irony that this is a technology based site, focused on software. You know, a sector that isn't nearly as tied to physical resources as other sectors. It's the whole reason our industry exploded, because you can make software and ship it an infinite number of times, allowing you to scale like no other sector can. But my poin…

But once you've innovated that first bit, you're in a mature industry, do you do the hard thing and innovate again or do you just stay there slowly becoming irrelevant, or do you optimise what you have and figure out more income sources from the same innovation for even more money?

Take a look at any mature software product, do they try to innovate more, or do they figure out how to put more advertisements into it?

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

#898

Post by daemin »

mastercheif wrote: post #713
walrus01 wrote: post #611

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am not aware of any smart TV that actively solicits a DHCP lease and default route outbound from anything it's plugged into by the 100M ethernet built into a current gen HDMI link. At least not yet. And since I think the default behavior for things like xboxes, playstations and apple TV is not to be a dhcp server and provide routing/NAT, I don't think a lot of things you can plug a TV into (also yet ), would provid…

HDMI Ethernet was included in the spec 15 years ago and not a single consumer device (that I am aware of) ever implemented it. Idk why this is so often citied in Smart TV boogeyman arguments.

Because it's there and available should they ever want to use it, and most people would not know that the HDMI cable is potentially another network cable.

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

#900

Post by TonyStr »

godelski wrote: post #871
phkahler wrote: post #831

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IANAL but without concent I think LG is comitting a crime here. The owner who ostensibly agreed to obtain concent through the ToS might be breaking their agreement, but wouldn't that be a separate issue? ToS and other click licenses have been making shit up for way too long.

IANAL, but I believe the argument is that agreeing to the TOS constitutes consent. Even though no reasonable person would believe such a thing would be in the TOS and no reasonable person reads the full TOS (no person actually could...). Perhaps we start suing one another for not disclosing the wire tapping, forcing the lawsuit upwards towards LG. It'd be more efficient to sue LG, but lawyers don't seem to be done th…

IANAL, but only the owner can consent through the TOS. The owner does not collect or process the data, so it's entirely on LG to ensure proper consent, not the owner. Breaking a TOS is not a crime, and can only be punished by restricting or disallowing access to a service, but collecting personal data without consent is a huge problem in the EU.
Post reply on HN