Slashdot Mirror
New Samsung TV Watches You Watching It
CanHasDIY writes "Straight out of 1984, Samsung has unveiled a new series of televisions with integrated cameras and microphones, complete with facial and voice recognition software. Best of all, there appears to be no physical indication of the mic and camera's status, so consumers have no way of knowing when they're being monitored, or by whom... and if you don't find the idea of a TV that watches you creepy enough, apparently Samsung's Terms of Service include a clause allowing third-party apps to make use of the monitoring system, and use the data gathered for their own purposes. Nothing Orwellian about that..."
I'd just put duct tape over the lens, or better yet, open the thing up and snip the wires going to the mic and camera(s)
The warranty would go bye-bye but my privacy doesn't.
the best answer is always "to protect others whose freedom of political and spiritual expression is threatened by your actions". Always.
CS majors know the time/space tradeoff, but they never get taught the 3rd, crucial, tradeoff of the set: comprehension!
The problem is, by bypassing the "feature" you are still paying for it, which will encourage Samgsung and other TV makers to continue to inculde it.
. .
Re: It will never be true in my house.
Depends who is giving you your computer, device or job?
A school can network to your home with little public comment about camera use
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robbins_v._Lower_Merion_School_District
The background paperwork once needed for high risk, cleared work is now becoming normal
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/job-applicants-asked-turn-facebook-passwords-article-1.1047427
Then you have the CIA hinting at the joy of a fully networked US home
http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2012/03/petraeus-tv-remote/
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
Rejecting bullshit like that is about as easy as rejecting 3D televisions and cable TV. Practically no effort at all....
actually, it's even easier. Leave the entire TV in its box. In the shop.
Because you don't want those "features", but all the other HDTV makers jumped on the bandwagon too, and you simply can't find a non-bugged set?
That's how this kind of thing becomes ubiquitous you know.
Easy; but actually deeply misleading...
If there is a lesson of the various socialist surveillance dystopias, it is that unaided state surveillance is too expensive to survive(y hello thar, East Germany) and tends to stifle out of fear the new technologies that would ultimately help it prosper(rather like the MPAA...)
In good old free world, on the other hand, technological development and the enthusiastic forces of private enterprise produce all the groundwork needed for surveillance and control of the sort that the Evil Empire could only dream of, just waiting to be subpeonaed when needed...
But are you sure that LED is not controlled by software (drivers)? Because otherwise, someone with control over the OS could disable that feature and record unannounced, while giving you a false sense of security.
Paranoia ftw.
Dilbert RSS feed
The television has detected more persons in the room than this content is licensed for.
Please reduce the number of persons in the room, or press the RED button to authorise a payment of a $X per additional person in the room.
Please explain to me why not having an indicator light is significant. The manufacturer controls how the entire thing is built, so it could also easily build in a function to use the camera but without making any status light come on. As I type this the status light of the camera in my Lenovo laptop is off.. But is the camera off, really?
Bit of a silly article. If you don't like web cams (or any camera) then just say so. Makes no sense to fully trust Logitech but not Samsung or anyone else.
Encore for the tinfoilers: every iPhone comes with one or two cameras. And you really don't know about the software that runs it.
Next.
Then start up a new bug-less brand and make a LOT of noise about the fact that /your/ TVs aren't watching your children watch saturday morning cartoons in their underwear and streaming it over the internet.
You will rake it in hand over fist
it is that unaided state surveillance is too expensive to survive(y hello thar, East Germany) and tends to stifle out of fear the new technologies that would ultimately help it prosper(rather like the MPAA...)
Couple of things.
1) Cameras are a lot cheaper now.
2) East Germans weren't primarily afraid of the Stasi. They were afraid of their own neighbors. The surveillance state successfully co-opted the populace into doing its grunt work for free. That part hasn't changed, and won't, because at the end of the day, people are finks.
So, yes, unaided state surveillance may be too expensive to be feasible... but it wasn't, and won't, be unaided.