> Now, what he’s showing can be pretty scary. I wouldn’t want any attacker to be able to record me without knowing. But it’s important to remember the context here: earlier in the video, Wendell rooted the TV. He has full access to everything on it. To run those commands and programs, he had to log into WebOS via SSH and run them on the device. He didn't show remoting calling those commands, nor was this done on an unmodified device.

> If you root or jailbreak your devices, you've, by their very nature, broken their security. If he can demonstrate someone remotely jailbreaking your TV, or flipping on those settings without you knowing or doing anything to your TV, that would be a far more damning issue, in my view.

What is this authors point?

LG doesn’t need a root exploit to get this info because they made the fucking thing.

I read the article and then grepped for “Texas” to see if I missed it. The author never mentions the fact that this data collection was only found out initially because of a Texas government lawsuit that LG settled on by agreeing to give “informed consent” to users about data collection and then the warnings started popping up in unexpected places.

Is the author arguing that jailbreaking your device to find out what the manufacturer can do to gather data on you is dangerous because I don’t know, questioning your corporate overlords is bad or something?

▲

p0lychromatic 3 hours ago | parent [-]

Some attacks shown on the video (like the "silent" voice recording) are initiated by the people in the video manually running those commands via SSH.

This is the major issue with this video: It mixes stuff done by LG (ACR) with stuff done via rooting (audio recording). And now people think LG is 24/7 recording your conversations and uploading them somewhere. This has not been proven.

▲

newsclues 3 hours ago | parent [-]

Fresh account defending a corporation.

▲

sersi 5 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

It's not a question of defending a corporation, it's that publishing a video that mixes true facts with facts that are not quite right weakens your argument and makes it easier for the corporation to control the narrative by pointing anything that's disingenuous.

▲

p0lychromatic 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

1. Ad hominem. 2. No, LG is not perfect here and their TVs are bloated as fuck and they do questionable things privacy-wise. However, that still does not mean that they listen on every conversation, as shown in the video.

That nuance is important if you value good journalism.

Otherwise if we're just our here throwing random allegations because "corp bad", might as well say LG 's TVs are turning the frickin' frogs gay.

▲

stuaxo 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

It's not just questionable things, its using dark patterns to do things that wouldn't stand up in court because they definitely illegal in places with data protection laws.

Sorry but such contrary takes in the face of this sort of evidence are either contrary for the sake of it or paid astroturfing.

	▲	p0lychromatic 36 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		I agree on the dark patterns. And I do not claim that ACR and all the privacy violating crap bundled into modern devices is good. No, it is evil. However, just because your TV does ACR, does not immediately mean they listen 24/7 through your TV through any conversations even if the TV is off. That is another, also quite different level of claim.

▲

lovich 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

It’s the era of ai bots and coördinated agitprop from nation states.

Spend some time building your reputation before arguing for divisive topics or be ignored.

Consider it a mechanical Turk but for social trust.

▲

p0lychromatic 38 minutes ago | parent [-]

How do you build reputation if everyone starts tells you to build reputation first?

You have to start somewhere. Better makes sense to start looking at the arguments rather than the author.

It also helps you train your brain. Stop trusting someone solely because of who they are.

▲

lovich 35 minutes ago | parent [-]

This is hacker news. Not Reddit.

You can comment about anything here and build credibility.

Just don’t start on the most divisive topics.

	▲	handoflixue 15 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		Four relevant bullet points from the Hacker News Guidelines: * When disagreeing, please reply to the argument instead of calling names. * Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize. Assume good faith. * Please don't post shallow dismissals * Please don't post insinuations about astroturfing, shilling, brigading, foreign agents, and the like. It degrades discussion and is usually mistaken. And yet not once does it mention "don't start commenting on divisive topics"