This is an exhausting read. From the diminishing use of the word “rape” to the steam of conscious delivery to the blogspam cliches of hyperbole and exclamation.

The malware installed by LG on Microsoft PCs and the spying by smart TVs are both despicable. But I couldn’t get through this article.

▲

spockz 4 hours ago | parent | next [-]

I find it so incredibly short sighted to implement such shenanigans. I was set to buy a LG 39GX950B as an upgrade to my current ultrawide until I read that they will automatically install an installer that will ask whether you want to install additional tools every freaking time you plug in the monitor. Absurd.

▲

Terr_ 3 hours ago | parent [-]

> short sighted to implement such shenanigans

Even if they were convenient shenanigans, in the longer term:

Political action > Purchasing Choices > Individual modifications

	▲	left-struck 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		I disagree, clearly purchasing choices only hurt you and doesn’t help the situation. Instead we should embrace hacker culture and take by force that which won’t be given to us. By force I mean the gentle kind of force of forcibly owning the stuff you already legally own. There’s never been a better time, we’re in this sweet spot where we have LLM agents that can help normal people do this stuff, but not yet at the point where a significant amount of the consumer technology we use has been hardened.

▲

majorchord 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

The author's "Artwork" page might explain a few things.

▲

ebtebt 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Agreed.

A non-cohesive angry rant

▲

ImPostingOnHN 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Yeah, I didn't get this part:

> Hah! I don't have to worry about this! I got Linux! For now.. That's true. But EDID transmission still happens

EDID transmission is how monitors communicate their specs to the computer, how is that an issue?

In fact, EDID transmission is one of the reasons you can plug a monitor into your computer and have it "just work", without needing to install additional proprietary drivers (why do this?)

> But what stops LG from convincing the Ubuntu maintainers to make an LG variant of their supposed driver to magically appear in your snap or apt package repository? You hope to God they don't, but the danger is always there.

So the whole argument there is that yes, it is safe, but there exists a nonzero possibility that it won't be in the future? Couldn't the author have just written "this is not an issue on linux" and saved paragraphs of breathless purple prose?