1357
OpenAI banned a user who reverse engineered his Samsung TV (thelemmy.club)
submitted 4 days ago by to c/localllama@sh.itjust.works
373 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Hacker reverse engineers his Samsung TV and finds on-device AI listening for your dog and baby, watching what you watch, and borrowing your soundbar's mic if the TV doesn't have one. Then OpenAI banned him for reverse-engineering it.

Source:

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 7 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (3 children)

I suspect that it won't be long until keeping it off your home network is meaningless.

Many smart devices already search for and connect to open networks. Not an issue for most tech-savvy people who maintain their own networks, but there are a lot of people out there that either don't know or don't care that their telecom-provided gateways maintain an open wireless network by default, in addition to their private networks for home use.

My pessimistic take: the intent behind this is to create a de-facto mesh for IoT devices in areas where people live close to each other, i.e. apartment buildings and townhomes.

Integrated cellular modems are relatively inexpensive; it's not too far of a reach to think that soon, IoT devices won't need to rely on wifi to send their surveillance reports targeted marketing data.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 2 days ago (2 children)

    Could be. I don't think it's going to get that far.

    Companies are trying to speedrun and normalize intrusive tech like this because people and governments (at least at the state level here in the US) are starting to catch on. For example, since June Flock has lost nearly 400 contracts in 36 US states, which I personally would never have predicted, and if Texas of all states is taking on mass surveillance, it's not a stretch to think that local laws against this kind of tech will materialize in at least 2/3 of the US states.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 days ago (1 child)

    You're more hopeful than I am, but I hope that you're right. Historically, the US hasn't had a good track record in that regard. While some have stepped away from the tech altogether, many of the municipalities that cancelled their Flock contracts just to sign on with a new ALPR vendor. For them, want to keep the government overreach and police-state surveillance, without the bad public image associated with the Flock brand.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 2 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

    many of the municipalities that cancelled their Flock contracts just to sign on with a new ALPR vendor.

    People keep saying this, but there's not a ton of info out there to substantiate it that I've seen. More than 100 of those Flock contracts were canceled in September alone. I think it's just speculation, but there is also an election in a few weeks, so I suppose it's possible we could see a pivot post-election.

    I also don't think a brand change is going to matter. People are pissed in bi-partisan fashion, and it's weird, but there's something about this level of surveillance that has inexplicably radicalized otherwise apolitical people.

    You’re more hopeful than I am,

    It's not so much a matter of hope as it is a matter of what's dangerous to the state, which is ironically why Paxton's so hardcore on this. TV's being weaponized as mass surveillance tools is, evidently, something the state was not clued in on and most of these are manufactured in China. I don't think any US government at any level cares much about intruding on civil liberties, but they do care about protecting the Epstein Class.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent