| ▲ | aeternum 8 hours ago |
| Note that their statement could also be true if they record 99% of the time. We need to start calling companies out for meaningless weasel statements like "We don't record continuously". The majority of the problem is also simply the ability to record. Putting a remote control listening hardware on a device that runs a plethora of 3rd party apps and with full connection to the internet means that even if LG isn't controlling that mic, someone else will be. |
|
| ▲ | cassianoleal 7 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| In any case, "We don't record continuously" is still recording. They should not be recording at all! |
| |
| ▲ | tredre3 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | Enough with the knee jerk reactions. They have to record in some cases. You don't have to like those features, but plenty of people want those features. - The television has voice control. - The television has a manually triggered speech-to-text feature so you don't have to type with tv remote. | | |
| ▲ | hananova 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | You simply do not say something like “we don’t record continuously” if the reality is that you only record when voice control or speech to text is active. Given the entire industry’s track record, the only sane thing to do when confronted with weasel wording is to assume the truth is the worst possible interpretation that isn’t a blatant lie, and even then, sometimes it is just a blatant lie. Here’s some examples: - We don’t record continuously -> We record nearly all the time, only stopping to upload the recording. - We do not sell your data -> But we do “share” it. - All your data is protected from unauthorized LLM scraping -> But we define all the big tech companies as authorized scraping. | |
| ▲ | beached_whale an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | None of that requires recording and has been done with embedded hw with local software for years. | |
| ▲ | GrinningFool 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | You'd think if that was all they recorded for, they would be saying it very loudly to end the speculation that weasel-wording leads to. | |
| ▲ | 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | [deleted] | |
| ▲ | matheusmoreira 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | > Enough with the knee jerk reactions. No. Stop minimizing their abuse. |
|
|
|
| ▲ | isp 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Yes. Another example: > If no wake word is detected, the audio is processed locally, promptly deleted, and is not transmitted to LG servers. This statement could still be true when: * The audio transmission is to non-LG servers (e.g., Alphonso). * The audio isn't transmitted, but the text transcription is. |
| |
|
| ▲ | seemaze 7 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| As someone who hasn’t owned a television in decades, why would a TV even need a microphone in the first place? How many other household devices have a microphone whose primary function is orthogonal to recording audio? |
| |
| ▲ | ygjb 7 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | There are lots of good reasons that are used to paper over the abuse cases. Microphones in tvs are a useful accessibility feature when they enable voice commands for the user, and allow them to be used as voice assistants. They also enable tvs with a camera and microphone to be used as video calling or audio calling interfaces. Used well we get star Trek view screens, used poorly we get little brother monitoring. For those interested, it turns the tv into an interactive terminal for voice and camera powered video games, which are becoming more popular. Unfortunately advertising and tracking incentives drive the abuse cases to the top and will crush the positive use cases :( | | |
| ▲ | hilbert42 24 minutes ago | parent | next [-] | | Like I do with laptops, just snip wires (or pull out header/connector) to microphone and camera. Problem partly solved. Fully solve it by disconnecting network cable/Wi-Fi so there's no internet. For me a TV set only receives FTA signals and has connectors for local media/AV input. It ceases to be a TV set when it starts doing what my PCs and laptops do. (Anonymity is the reason why FTA broadcasting is still so very important, by design it's only one-way — broadcaster to listener/viewer. Unfortunately smart TVs and the internet subvert anonymity by design.) | |
| ▲ | GreenVulpine 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | There's no practical reason for most people. Spying is the primary function. Edge cases like accessibility or conferencing can be easily enabled with an add on USB mic. You'd need a USB webcam with mic for conferencing anyway. | | |
| ▲ | qlte 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | People use voice commands on TV remotes all the time if they're using streaming apps. At this point it's the default way to interact with the UI for many people. Typing out the show you're searching for with an awkward onscreen keyboard is a huge pain compared to just clicking a button and speaking. HN users are very much in a bubble if it's surprising to learn consumers expect voice control functionality on a new TV. |
| |
| ▲ | seemaze 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Are there any useful resources for finding devices that don't have surveillance apparatus built in? I'm still not purchasing a television. The last thing I need is more screen time in my life. | | |
| ▲ | wongarsu 4 hours ago | parent [-] | | You'd be looking for what's now called a "dumb tv". But those are getting rare, because TVs that can't sell your watch data have to be more expensive to make up for that, and that doesn't sell. Commercial screens are an option, as are computer monitors. Or getting a smart tv and never connecting it to the internet. So far nobody has started shipping TVs with a mobile connection to exfiltrate data, as far as we know. Unlike cars. | | |
| ▲ | ygjb 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | There are plans to build these networks at various stages. Putatively to enable connectivity, but in practice the tech creates a device to device mesh network that enables side channel communication over a secure mechanism that is not necessarily subject to use control. | |
| ▲ | trinsic2 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | I think it would be less time consuming to build one yourself. | | |
| ▲ | qlte 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | Less time consuming than just ... not connecting a new TV to WiFi? It's pretty straightforward to get dumb behavior out of a modern smart TV as long as you're satisfied with the factory installed firmware version. |
|
|
| |
| ▲ | tmpz22 7 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | > Microphones in tvs are a useful accessibility feature Made nearly moot by the presence of microphones in most (all?) modern remotes. I say nearly moot because its worth noting the ability to operate a physical remote may itself be prohibitive to some. So in effect, there are a multitude microphones in a modern LG environment. | | |
| ▲ | ygjb 6 hours ago | parent [-] | | a tv may be the only shared device in low income homes. |
|
| |
| ▲ | HPsquared 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Voice recognition is really useful when searching. It's annoying to type with a TV remote. Also you can just say what you want like "play breaking bad on Netflix" and it'll just do it. Edit: also the mic in the remote has a function to calibrate the speakers to the room (correcting for the impulse response of the room basically) which can make the audio much better. | | |
| ▲ | GrinningFool 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | Since you're using it for Netflix, etc I assume it has unrestricted Internet access. With that and microphone access, you're giving tacit permission to capture and upload basically whatever it wants, to whoever it wants. That seems unwise, no matter how helpful the features are. |
| |
| ▲ | shrubble 7 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Every speaker can be used as a microphone if the circuitry is added to do so. | | |
| ▲ | mesrik 5 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Many common SOC's MediaTek, Realtek, and Broadcom SOC's quite often used modern audio capable devices analog pins can be software defined either input or output. IIRC I saw already Bruce Schneider's blog some team proof of concept where they listened using laptop speakers what was spoken in that room. Audio quality wasn't perfect, but it making sense what was spoken was good enough. | |
| ▲ | Bud 6 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | [dead] |
| |
| ▲ | 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | [deleted] | |
| ▲ | fodkodrasz 7 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Of course it is needed in a https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telescreen ... Some "smart" TVs could do skype in the past, I'm not sure if they needed external headsets of worked with builtin mikes. | |
| ▲ | germandiago 7 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | 1984 purposes. |
|
|
| ▲ | isodev 6 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| > The majority of the problem is also simply the ability to record. Exactly, and recent announcements like Apple normalising always on recording, even wrapped in “big promises” on privacy, deserve a lot more attention and strong regulation. |