this post was submitted on 07 Nov 2026
567 points (99.8% liked)

privacy

10724 readers
43 users here now

Big tech and governments are monitoring and recording your eating activities. c/Privacy provides tips and tricks to protect your privacy against global surveillance.

Partners:

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
 

LG's smart TV privacy woes continue as Portugal's Citizen Voice asks the court to investigate. Are smart TVs too keen to gather data?

all 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] unphazed@lemmy.world 24 points 2 days ago (4 children)

Corporation: Do evil shit to achieve optimum profit, usually in 100s of millions of extra profit. Laws: Yeah this'll cost you 10 million.

I'm sure there's a name for this but I'm calling it Litigation Offset Loss. So long as the punitive cost is outweighed by the profit gained there is no incentive to act ethically. The only thing worse is corporate self regulation.

[–] Garfunkel@lemmy.ca 6 points 2 days ago

I'm just saying, americans could solve a lot of problems with a guillotine...

[–] PieMePlenty@lemmy.world 5 points 2 days ago

I always heard its "the cost of doing business".

[–] BarneyPiccolo@lemmy.today 2 points 2 days ago

It's called "The government wets it's beak."

The MAGA government doesn't mind if you fleece the rubes, that's what they're there for, but if you are particularly successful, you have to make sure the government gets its taste.

[–] kunaltyagi@programming.dev 1 points 2 days ago

Let me introduce you to your new best friend: regulatory capture. This gives you the worst of all: low cost of doing business with high deregulation similar to self-regulation but with the ability to point to the regulatory body for any high profile issues

[–] melsaskca@lemmy.ca 10 points 2 days ago

Yeah, I read that on my fridge this morning.

[–] some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org 37 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Executives should go to prison for spying on people in their homes.

[–] dubs@lemmy.dbzer0.com 8 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Stalking charges, and restraining orders is the bare minimum here

[–] ulterno@programming.dev 4 points 2 days ago (1 children)

That would be lovely to see implemented.
Samsung execs unable to go withing 100m radius of any random chap who might have bought a Samsung TV in the past 10 years.

[–] FudgyMcTubbs@lemmy.world 4 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Point of clarification -- this thread is about an LG lawsuit.

Samsung is allegedly doing similar heinous shit, so I get why the company and its execs would come to mind.

[–] ulterno@programming.dev 2 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

In my defence, I had put them in the same bucket in my brain.

Although I tend to put all of them in the same bucket given enough time, including the company I am working for...
My simple response to a net connected device is to drop them a mail asking whether the appliance will work its whole life without requiring an internet connected activation and if I have either no response, or some "we care for customer" bs, then I just don't buy.
The underside of a rock sometimes feels much better.

[–] SeductiveTortoise@piefed.social 75 points 3 days ago (3 children)

They should be taken off the shelves entirely until they've proven they fixed it. This should hurt them good enough to let others break out a sweat and fix theirs too. Because no way is Samsung and all the others not doing the same.

[–] shalafi@lemmy.world 4 points 3 days ago (2 children)

You got me wondering how that works. The retailers have already paid, so that wouldn't hurt them immediately. Of course further orders would be shut off instantly.

Would the government order LG to buy back units already sold or is the retailer shit out of luck?

[–] dubs@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 2 days ago

Retailers should immediately get their money back in an instance like this. I have no love for the retailers, but it would at least hurt the manufacturer.

You can bet the retailers would sue them. And not occupying shelves cost them a lot of money. What's in stock right now isn't what's sold in a year. Yes, it would suck for the retailers, but it would SUUUUCK for LG.

[–] Auli@lemmy.ca 5 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Of course it is this was known years ago but hard to search now as there are a ton of stuff about it now.

The difference is evidence

[–] halezinflames@lemmus.org 17 points 2 days ago (1 children)

"Alleged"

How obvious does it need to be?

[–] dev_null@lemmy.ml 18 points 2 days ago (1 children)

It's alleged because they haven't been convicted of a crime. That they did it is not in question, what's in question is what crime (if any) will they be convicted of. Could be this or something else or nothing.

[–] halezinflames@lemmus.org 3 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Ahh fair enough, I just thought alleged meant that it wasn't 100% clear that they did it or not.

[–] kunaltyagi@programming.dev 1 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

LG lawyers will definitely try to argue that they didn't do what they did

[–] halezinflames@lemmus.org 1 points 1 day ago

because of course they will

[–] bitteroldcoot@piefed.social 79 points 3 days ago

About fucking time!

[–] THEPIGWHODIDIT@lemmy.world 17 points 3 days ago (1 children)

I worry about these screens being in doctors offices and hospitals without their knowledge is transcribing all this info they should not be.

[–] Tiger666@lemmy.ca 2 points 2 days ago

Good point.

[–] justlemmyin@lemmy.world 33 points 3 days ago (1 children)
[–] Malica@lemmy.zip 10 points 3 days ago (1 children)

If there's a class action I'm joining

[–] Psythik@lemmy.world 4 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

Same. I want my $2 check.

Thankfully I never connected my C1 to wifi, but knowing that it'll try to silently connect to an open network, IDK how effective that is. I'm seriously considering opening the thing and physically disabling the wifi chip.

[–] Malica@lemmy.zip 1 points 2 days ago

That's what I plan to do, I bought 3 of these fucking things 😭

[–] InFerNo@lemmy.ml 18 points 3 days ago

"We own the glass"

Me: what an odd thing to say

[–] Washedupcynic@lemmy.ca 2 points 2 days ago

Stephen Burke out here like:

[–] Hueristic_Autistic@lemmy.world 3 points 3 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

Not so easy when a different countries wiretapping laws vary from the United States wire tapping laws. Bwhahahaha.

[–] MalMen@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 days ago

portugal caralho!