14 ms·

> ACR uses audio fingerprinting technology so they aren't even denying listening in on everything?

xethos 4d ago
"Everything" would include the microphone, both in the remote and the TV. They're claiming to split off the audio, with one path going to the speakers (and there to your ears), and the other path being hashed (and from there to LG). They still claim to get your media's audio, but deny using the microphones.
- juiceland 4d ago
  If they don’t use the microphones why do they have a statement in their Terms of Service to not say sensitive things in front of your TV? It says the TV owner is "solely responsible" for obtaining all necessary consents from third parties whose voices may be recorded by the device, and must warn household members and guests that their voices may be recorded, and if someone does not agree, the TV's microphone and voice functions need to be turned off. [0] [0] https://www.lg.com/us/terms https://www.lg.com/us/terms
  - gruez 4d ago
    >If they don’t use the microphones why do they have a statement in their Terms of Service to not say sensitive things in front of your TV? Other people have mentioned there's other voice features like diction/voice control, so it's plausibly for that.
    - mitxela 4d ago
      That's probably the program that uploads everything you say then. Nobody thought the ACR was doing that.
  - BalinKing 4d ago
    > If they don’t use the microphones why do they have a statement in their Terms of Service to not say sensitive things in front of your TV? 1. The introduction says that Smart TVs are not included in this ToS ("not including Smart TVs"). 2. Where do the terms say anything about "sensitive" content? The closest thing I see is section 4.d, but that's just about wiretapping/privacy laws in general.
  - fsuts 4d ago
    Which paragraph?
- mitxela 4d ago
  They deny ACR uses the microphones. Big difference. Nobody thought ACR used the microphones.
llm_nerd 4d ago
They explicitly state that the audio ACR is done through the "TV’s internal audio processor". e.g. rendered audio, not recorded audio. I mean, you could stretch the claim to have it internal include recorded audio, but that seems dubious.
- sgc 4d ago
  Why are you giving a shady company with shady terms and shady history the benefit of the doubt?
  - llm_nerd 4d ago
    Because when people cry wolf, and then there is no wolf, it actually harms the consumer by lowering everyone's guard. Have people not learned this yet? Gamers Nexus discovered recently, through their "AMD blacklisting" bit (when some relatively minor mid-lifecycle refresh of a product they didn't get a demo unit, so it turned into some "we are the truthsayers!" bit), that doing the Louis Rossmann routine earns them loads of links and clicks. So they're firmly in the cry wolf territory now, and it makes me more dubious of their claims that the people they are questioning. This whole space is filled with bullshit now. Saw another video where a big channel talks about why TVs are so cheap now, and they then explain it that it's because they sell your data. In the real world, the selling data bit, ACR, and so on, is absolutely tiny dollars business. TVs are cheap because massive factories are pumping out these almost entirely plastic products in enormous numbers, and they're extremely cheap to make, and the IP has all been long amortized out.
    - notpushkin 4d ago
      Still doesn’t mean they’re not selling the data?
    - tredre3 4d ago
      I agree with you that accusations need to be backed by proofs and the kneejerk reactions on HN are embarrassing to read and unhelpful. Big bad evil corp, every single time. I mean those reactions are all over social media, but I just expected a little bit less knee jerk from HN. > In the real world, the selling data bit, ACR, and so on, is absolutely tiny dollars business. TVs are cheap because massive factories are pumping out these almost entirely plastic products in enormous numbers, and they're extremely cheap to make, and the IP has all been long amortized out. Unfortunately that part if your comment is provably false in at least one instance: Vizio. It's a shame, I thought we were on the same page about spreading half truths. Vizio's numbers are famously public due to its recent sale. We know they lost money on most televisions sold (not all!), and they made it up in ad revenue and content distribution from those TVs. It doesn't prove that LG loses money on its TVs, but it's clearly not as clear cut as you make it out to be.
mitxela 4d ago
They're not denying anything about programs other than ACR. That's telling. They didn't say "your TV doesn't listen" or "your TV doesn't collect"

"Everything" would include the microphone, both in the remote and the TV. They're claiming to split off the audio, with one path going to the speakers (and there to your ears), and the other path being hashed (and from there to LG). They still claim to get your media's audio, but deny using the microphones.

juiceland 4d ago
If they don’t use the microphones why do they have a statement in their Terms of Service to not say sensitive things in front of your TV? It says the TV owner is "solely responsible" for obtaining all necessary consents from third parties whose voices may be recorded by the device, and must warn household members and guests that their voices may be recorded, and if someone does not agree, the TV's microphone and voice functions need to be turned off. [0] [0] https://www.lg.com/us/terms https://www.lg.com/us/terms
- gruez 4d ago
  >If they don’t use the microphones why do they have a statement in their Terms of Service to not say sensitive things in front of your TV? Other people have mentioned there's other voice features like diction/voice control, so it's plausibly for that.
  - mitxela 4d ago
    That's probably the program that uploads everything you say then. Nobody thought the ACR was doing that.
- BalinKing 4d ago
  > If they don’t use the microphones why do they have a statement in their Terms of Service to not say sensitive things in front of your TV? 1. The introduction says that Smart TVs are not included in this ToS ("not including Smart TVs"). 2. Where do the terms say anything about "sensitive" content? The closest thing I see is section 4.d, but that's just about wiretapping/privacy laws in general.
- fsuts 4d ago
  Which paragraph?
mitxela 4d ago
They deny ACR uses the microphones. Big difference. Nobody thought ACR used the microphones.

llm_nerd 4d ago

They explicitly state that the audio ACR is done through the "TV’s internal audio processor". e.g. rendered audio, not recorded audio. I mean, you could stretch the claim to have it internal include recorded audio, but that seems dubious.

sgc 4d ago
Why are you giving a shady company with shady terms and shady history the benefit of the doubt?
- llm_nerd 4d ago
  Because when people cry wolf, and then there is no wolf, it actually harms the consumer by lowering everyone's guard. Have people not learned this yet? Gamers Nexus discovered recently, through their "AMD blacklisting" bit (when some relatively minor mid-lifecycle refresh of a product they didn't get a demo unit, so it turned into some "we are the truthsayers!" bit), that doing the Louis Rossmann routine earns them loads of links and clicks. So they're firmly in the cry wolf territory now, and it makes me more dubious of their claims that the people they are questioning. This whole space is filled with bullshit now. Saw another video where a big channel talks about why TVs are so cheap now, and they then explain it that it's because they sell your data. In the real world, the selling data bit, ACR, and so on, is absolutely tiny dollars business. TVs are cheap because massive factories are pumping out these almost entirely plastic products in enormous numbers, and they're extremely cheap to make, and the IP has all been long amortized out.
  - notpushkin 4d ago
    Still doesn’t mean they’re not selling the data?
  - tredre3 4d ago
    I agree with you that accusations need to be backed by proofs and the kneejerk reactions on HN are embarrassing to read and unhelpful. Big bad evil corp, every single time. I mean those reactions are all over social media, but I just expected a little bit less knee jerk from HN. > In the real world, the selling data bit, ACR, and so on, is absolutely tiny dollars business. TVs are cheap because massive factories are pumping out these almost entirely plastic products in enormous numbers, and they're extremely cheap to make, and the IP has all been long amortized out. Unfortunately that part if your comment is provably false in at least one instance: Vizio. It's a shame, I thought we were on the same page about spreading half truths. Vizio's numbers are famously public due to its recent sale. We know they lost money on most televisions sold (not all!), and they made it up in ad revenue and content distribution from those TVs. It doesn't prove that LG loses money on its TVs, but it's clearly not as clear cut as you make it out to be.

mitxela 4d ago

They're not denying anything about programs other than ACR. That's telling. They didn't say "your TV doesn't listen" or "your TV doesn't collect"