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.