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

Post by Obscurity4340 » Wed, Sep 09, 2026, 5:53 AM UTC

ZPrimed wrote: post #985

callc wrote: post #800

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Respectfully disagree. Toggle buttons have an expected behavior that everyone understands. It should work just like a physical button. I don’t appreciate the “we know better for you so we’ll adjust the behavior accordingly” MITM.

A bunch of the morons out there who turn off wifi out in public because they read some random NYPost article about it "tracking" you, would then be bitching to Apple and/or their cell carriers about why their performance is so bad at home when it doesn't auto-join wifi overnight. I would agree with you that it should operate like a dumb toggle if they didn't have the notification saying that it would auto re-enable a…

Post by ikr678 » Wed, Sep 09, 2026, 6:56 AM UTC

FractalParadigm wrote: post #571

godelski wrote: post #538

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On top of that, the first few minutes of the video suggests it captures your neighbors' device and IP information. I'm sure the ToS has some BS about you being required to inform any guests, but what if your TV is just recording your neighbors because they are close enough? Just wait, I'm sure the "solution" will be that TVs start displaying reminders that you're being recorded... Is our inability to innovate in tech…

Re. The last paragraph, that's what confuses me the most about all of this. LG has virtually held a monopoly of the entire OLED TV market for the past ~15 years, selling (arguably) one of the TVs on the market and being the only thing I've recommended people buy in about as long. They could have done literally nothing but update the hardware every other year with a newer SoC, HDMI version, etc. and done just fine. No…

Post by bayindirh » Wed, Sep 09, 2026, 7:28 AM UTC

Obscurity4340 wrote: post #990

bayindirh wrote: post #983

Earlier quoted context omitted.

TL;DR: I understand you and your frustrations, but I use Apple devices exactly because of the opinions of it . Not everyone hates these behaviors with a passion of a thousand suns. Long version: We have different expectations from our systems. I personally use Mac laptops as well, and Apple devices use P2P wireless and Bluetooth for so many little things you use everyday, so when I click it and it explicitly prints "…

Also how do you explain the constant nags to Enable iCloud with the only options being eithet Yes, or Not Now (but we'll bring it up regularly until you say yes)? Isnt that sort of disrespectful or comtemptuous of the concept of consent? If i dont want something, its a bit weird to force me to keep saying no not now...but yes is forever. Little rapey isnt it? If i want it i will seek it out, its just cynical to not o…

Post by Jolter » Wed, Sep 09, 2026, 8:37 AM UTC

d1sxeyes wrote: post #923

TonyStr wrote: post #894

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 a…

Post by gchamonlive » Wed, Sep 09, 2026, 11:50 AM UTC

ASalazarMX wrote: post #974

trashb wrote: post #915

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 companie…

What's even crazier is that companies doing this have a full team of lawyers, they know it won't hold up in court, but they also know there are no consequences for deliberately put things there that won't hold up in court. A bit more crazy that they are gambling on the likelihood of winning in case they are actually challenged, cementing a twisted precedent just to keep the next quarter on trend.