The TV will join that automatically without asking you because they have an agreement with the network provider.

This seems far fetched to me. Have you seen evidence or reliable reporting of this?

figglestar 4 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Why is this more far fetched than LG smart TVs recording audio while pretending to be off and caching the results waiting for an opportunity to exfiltrate the precious data? We're in a "if they can they will" world with this stuff.

Comcast sets up a secondary wifi network on their routers in your home that they use as the backhaul for smartphones. Why wouldn't they make a deal with LG or whoever to use that data? We've already established they'll do about a half-a-Stuxnet to get at this data, you're telling me they won't do a couple bulk deals with common ISPs?

	▲	8fingerlouie 10 minutes ago \| parent \| next [-]
		Why go through all that trouble of spoofing MAC addresses or assuming it will always be able to connect to an open WiFi network. 5G connectivity is cheap. You can put a 5G modem in pretty much any device for $10 or less, and pay roughly $2/year in subscription fees. My local water utility with ~900 subscribers pays $2/year for 5G connectivity for water meters, and I have no doubt you can get it much cheaper at scale. They don't even have to tell you about the 5G modem. It could exclusively be used for exfiltrating data about your viewing habits. It's virtually undetectable and more or less impossible to block. The TV could behave nice on the Wifi, you can block all the DNS servers you like, it would still be able to phone home.
	▲	jrmg 3 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		Okay, even if you don’t agree with me that it’s far fetched, claims of ‘X is doing Y’ usually require some evidence that X is doing Y to be considered credible.

▲

5 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

[deleted]