PSA for the home automation enthusiasts who keep smart TVs connected to the network to turn them on or off remotely: a lot of other sources that are likely connected to HDMI ports (Apple TVs, gaming PCs etc.) could do the same via HDMI-CEC, so unless you're truly using the 'smart' features there is less and less reasons to keep the TV itself connected to any network.
216M Spy TVs – The LG Smart TV Problem [video]
921–930 of 1001 posts
Re: 216M Spy TVs – The LG Smart TV Problem [video]
#922Earlier quoted context omitted.
What's absurd is that this doesn't void the terms by default. There should be limits to what companies can put in their ToS beyond which those terms aren't enforceable.
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.
The problem is the ToS can be overruled by the law. But you can still put wild stuff in there without consequence, it just won't hold up in court of course. However this makes it so that companies use the ToS as a scare tactic to deter people going to court in the first place, "look you agreed to us being able to do something illegal, you will lose court against our expensive lawyers".
ToS from a lot of tech companies say the wildest shit that doesn't hold up in court and they should get a penalty for putting that into these documents, as it is misleading and misrepresenting the agreement that the customer has with them.
Until some responsibility for illegal statements in the ToS happens I will read most comments from a ToS with a grain of salt and a lot of skepticism.
Re: 216M Spy TVs – The LG Smart TV Problem [video]
#923Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
Actually LG is not just a large corporation or even a oligarch, it is one of the major south korean chaebol groups and therefore has way more power in the legal and political space.
Re: 216M Spy TVs – The LG Smart TV Problem [video]
#924What would the HN crowd recommend for a good linux streaming box + hardware with decent TV UX and remote? My LG is completely offline and I'm using an nvidia shield to display any content, but I'm thinking maybe I need to go the extra mile, there nothing preventing an android tv box to do the same.
> My LG is completely offline Are you sure? They will seek out open WiFi and other neighboring LG TVs as relays.
yeah no open wifi in sight, MAC address is banned at the router level, but I appreciate the concern
Re: 216M Spy TVs – The LG Smart TV Problem [video]
#925What would the HN crowd recommend for a good linux streaming box + hardware with decent TV UX and remote? My LG is completely offline and I'm using an nvidia shield to display any content, but I'm thinking maybe I need to go the extra mile, there nothing preventing an android tv box to do the same.
Apple TV.
To the risk of contradicting myself, the less time I got, the more tempting it's been to jump into Apple's ecosystem. I love the hardware, I appreciate Apple's apparent care for privacy, but I just love my linux too much both in terms of UX and for what it represents.
Re: 216M Spy TVs – The LG Smart TV Problem [video]
#926Here 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?
There is a reason why Snowden cuts the internal microphones and cameras out of his mobile phones. I suppose you can permanently turn off the TV's microphone(or microphones) in the same fashion.
Re: 216M Spy TVs – The LG Smart TV Problem [video]
#927I've bought an LG Smart TV 5 years ago, read t&c where I was supposed to grant them any data they wanted, decided to disagree and kept all network functions disabled. I was ridiculed by my friends for that. At some point, I thought - maybe I'm really crazy to do so? Who am I, a caveman, a luddite? Oh well, I'm not. Not a bad tv though, many HDMI ports!
Same. And one of my requirements was that i can use HDMI ports without agreeing to TOS. Most android TVs do not allow this at all, LG did.
Re: 216M Spy TVs – The LG Smart TV Problem [video]
#928Re: 216M Spy TVs – The LG Smart TV Problem [video]
#929Am I glad I blocked my CX from 2020 very early from accessing the internet!
Looked into rooting - my old firmware would be ideal, but other than a native ambient lighting tap I don't really see anything worth my time. That model probably doesn't have a wide field mic yet to use for home automation.
Re: 216M Spy TVs – The LG Smart TV Problem [video]
#930Earlier 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.
It’s clearly unreasonable to assume that LG can know and procure consent from everyone you choose to allow into your living room.
It’s reasonable to push the burden of procuring that consent onto whoever controls entry to the space, with terms like this.
As a thought experiment, let’s take a service like Zoom where you can record video of participants. It’s reasonable to say “you’re operating the camera, if someone appears in the background, it’s your responsibility to make sure they’re informed and consent to the recording”. In fact, trying to establish the identity of the person in the background for the purposes of procuring consent is probably a greater intrusion on privacy than not.
The problem here is different. The problem is that the volume of data being collected is clearly unnecessary for achieving the purposes it’s intended for.