Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit
I agree with the author, the point is that the way the video and the overall research was done, the entire message was diluted too much.

There is substance in what they did. But they should have worked with an actual journalist to frame this properly and create pressure on the overarching topics.

If a TV company (LG or ANY of the others who have Ad-subsidiaries) needs to respond to this video, they can easily reframe the whole topic.

The most blatant example is that they demonstrate in the video that this TV, which has a built-in microphone for voice-control, that can be switched off with a mechanical switch:

1. Will record your voice when you ask it to transcribe your input to a textbox

2. Will process your voice to create this text it shows, as visible on the logs of the rooted OS

3. Will SHOW you that it's transcribing your input on the screen.

This is weakening the whole story.

--

In HN-terms: It's a constant-power, constantly-connected IoT-device with lots of sensors and huge compute-power, located in the center of your home.

There are big topics around this that deserve a huge spotlight, which apply to ALL TV manufacturers:

a. What data is actually being collected about the user, and what is done with this data?

b. How well is security handled on the TV to ensure no malicious usage?

Repeatedly jumping to the conclusion during the video that LG specifically is collecting ALL this local data to spy on you, without clear evidence, this just gives LG an easy way to respond and every other vendor enough room to distance themselves from the whole story.

loading story #49606679
loading story #49606735