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

901–910 of 1001 posts

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

#901

Post by lrvick »

zapzupnz wrote: post #798
lrvick wrote: post #788

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So most consumers are willing to knowingly give up privacy, security, and freedom just to save 20 bucks on a hdmi streaming device? I have no words for how depressing that is. Then again most consumers use Bytedance, Meta, Google, and Apple products so I guess I should not be too surprised.

> So most consumers are willing to knowingly "Knowingly". No, they don't know. You seem to think that because you know, then so must everybody else. I have no words for how depressing that way of thinking is.

Why would anyone not take 5 minutes to research a major purchase? They have Internet access!

I mean obviously I expect Grandma not to know, but anyone that knows enough to connect to the internet knows how to use a search engine.

Corpos get away with blatant factory malware and security negligence because consumers are so predictably unwilling to research anything beyond what their social media algorithm of choice shows them as they scroll.

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

#902

Post by blahblaher »

I've just looked at the terms of service and privacy terms on an "old" C1 Oled, and it's "disgusting" the amount of spying they want to do. Turned everything off except for the minimum required to play Youtube on the tv. What a pos of a company. And yes I know (almost?) all of them are doing something similar

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

#903

Post by ninalanyon »

Animats wrote: post #569

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…

When do you get to see these terms?

The discussion seems to imply that they are seen only after purchase (I haven't read the article).

If that is so they are void and unenforceable in most jurisdictions as you cannot agree to something in a contract that you cannot read.

Are such terms enforceable in the US?

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

#905

Post by Koshcheiushko »

I've one question: I've used android phone (realme, which is chinese). And i remember that whenever we used to discuss somethings among our friends, i started used to get ads realated to that on my laptop, phone within atmost a hour.

So, was realme transcribing all conversations and uploading it? Can someone answer?

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

#906

Post by gsliepen »

bigstrat2003 wrote: post #718
JoshTriplett wrote: post #617

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I think it's usually not malice, it's incompetence. Sufficiently advanced incompetence is indistinguishable from malice, and should be treated accordingly.

> Sufficiently advanced incompetence is indistinguishable from malice, and should be treated accordingly. I disagree with this as stated. Maybe in the right context you could make a case for it, but in general? Heck no. Intent matters a great deal, and there is no justice in treating someone incompetent (or negligent) the same as someone who is actually malicious. Both things are bad, but the latter is worse than the…

> Intent matters a great deal,

The road to hell is paved with good intentions.

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

#907

Post by bigbinary »

TonyStr wrote: post #894
godelski wrote: post #865

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

II could hit someone and say it was someone else’s fault, but delusion isn’t a legal defense.

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

#908

Post by spockz »

toomuchtodo wrote: post #845
spockz wrote: post #404

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I like this enough to actually considering buying one to get it to identify the endpoints. Maybe better to see first if we can find it in the firmware update downloads.

Have Claude or Astra reverse engineer the firmware?

I started asking Astra and Terra about this, including the idea of spoofing the data that was mentioned in this thread and got slammed with a warning for Cyber Abuse on my account, the thread is here https://chatgpt.com/s/cx_6a9fc635825481918c84187765645d5c.

I will be very careful going forward with what I use open ai for and what I phrase how.

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

#909

Post by m000 »

sbarre wrote: post #556
rpdillon wrote: post #398

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have a similar reaction from folks when I don't trust services/devices. Most telling moment was when I refused to upload my license to LinkedIn because I lost 2FA (token on phone, phone destroyed). Microsoft assured me they would "delete the license as soon as it was verified". I've written too many software systems for too many companies, and I do not believe them . Of course, they'd outsourced to AU10TIX, which d…

> my conclusion after dealing with them for many years is they will lie, cheat, and steal to get whatever they want Honestly, it's not even that extreme in most cases. I think it's usually not malice, it's incompetence. That's why I don't trust big companies with my data. Nothing to do with some CEO's evil plans, but more to do with the hundreds/thousands of mid-level "not my job" or "doing my best" workers who are a…

It's malice. Compliance tends to not "maximize the shareholder value". Why pay millions/year to maintain a compliance team when you can get away with paying a small fine from time to time?

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

#910

Post by jjav »

phkahler wrote: post #827
dghlsakjg wrote: post #753

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are limits. You can’t waive certain rights, and you can’t overwrite certain laws. The issue is that we haven’t made this shit against the law yet.

Ask LG who has agreed to their wiretapping. They can't tell you if some guest in front of a TV has agreed or not. How can that be concent?

Because LG is a large corporation and if there is something we have learned (or had proven) in 2026 is that laws don't apply if you oligarch hard enough.
Post reply on HN