DamianTV
05-21-2014, 04:08 PM
http://entertainment.slashdot.org/story/14/05/21/1456206/declining-lgs-new-ad-friendly-privacy-policy-removes-features-from-smart-tvs
"Techdirt and Consumerist posted articles about a user in the UK who, after a firmware update to his 2-year old LG Smart TV, declined their new Privacy Policy, only to find that most Internet-connected features (e.g. BBC iPlayer, Skype) of the TV now no longer work. From the Techdirt article: 'Does a manufacturer have the right to "brick" certain integral services just because the end user doesn't feel comfortable sharing a bunch of info with LG and other, unnamed third parties? LG certainly feels it has the right to do this. In fact, it makes no secret of this in its long Privacy Policy — a document that spends more time discussing the lack thereof, rather than privacy itself. The opening paragraph makes this perfectly clear.' To add, even declining the policy still results in non-specified information being sent to LG. LG's policy of spying on the viewing habits of customers, along with sending filenames of videos stored on USB devices connected to TVs, was previously discussed on Slashdot."
Posted in General Politicis because Privacy is Political.
Really, how long until you cant use a can opener unless you agree to tell not only the can opener maker, but an unknown plethora of third parties everything you are using that can opener for? General concensus seems to be "theyre only spying on you", like it will cause no one any harm what so ever.
for device in internet_ready Do | woods, throw |
Im afraid to even ask but would anyone even object to having mandatory cameras in your home filming you 24/7?
"Techdirt and Consumerist posted articles about a user in the UK who, after a firmware update to his 2-year old LG Smart TV, declined their new Privacy Policy, only to find that most Internet-connected features (e.g. BBC iPlayer, Skype) of the TV now no longer work. From the Techdirt article: 'Does a manufacturer have the right to "brick" certain integral services just because the end user doesn't feel comfortable sharing a bunch of info with LG and other, unnamed third parties? LG certainly feels it has the right to do this. In fact, it makes no secret of this in its long Privacy Policy — a document that spends more time discussing the lack thereof, rather than privacy itself. The opening paragraph makes this perfectly clear.' To add, even declining the policy still results in non-specified information being sent to LG. LG's policy of spying on the viewing habits of customers, along with sending filenames of videos stored on USB devices connected to TVs, was previously discussed on Slashdot."
Posted in General Politicis because Privacy is Political.
Really, how long until you cant use a can opener unless you agree to tell not only the can opener maker, but an unknown plethora of third parties everything you are using that can opener for? General concensus seems to be "theyre only spying on you", like it will cause no one any harm what so ever.
for device in internet_ready Do | woods, throw |
Im afraid to even ask but would anyone even object to having mandatory cameras in your home filming you 24/7?