3 ms·

> My perspective is that I don't really care. If this screed is just about telegraphing your own wilful disregard for online safety and profound disinterest/ab

> My perspective is that I don't really care. If this screed is just about telegraphing your own wilful disregard for online safety and profound disinterest/absence of knowledge about what a locally connected hostile network device is capable of, then it’s hardly worth responding to. However, if you’re trying to deliver an implied suggestion that “no-one should care”, then this actively harmful message deserves solid rejection. The consequences range from turning households into spam drones, to placing at-risk folks in physical peril through commoditised surveillance. It remains an extraordinarily privileged and wonderful thing to live without fear of the capabilities of a corporate- or state-level actor. What’s not so wonderful is being reminded that many folks with this privilege lack the self-awareness to appreciate it.

Jonnax 6y ago
You're putting words into my mouth. And changing the topic of conversation. I was responding to someone saying that their smart TV was full of adverts and how it's a requirement to block it. Where the convenience of the utility provided is greater than seeing an advert for a film on the menu page. You've flipped it around to vulnerable people being surveilled by corporate/state level actors. Why are Smart TVs singled out here? There's a tons of old Android phones that people use every day with sensitive information that are vulnerable to multiple exploits that will never get a patch. Or Routers that never get a patch from their Vendor especially if it's a whitebox from an ISP and they've replaced it with a newer model. It seems like Smart TVs have urban legends associated with them, I asked previously about the supposed "TV connecting to unsecured WIFI" thing that always comes up and nobody had any evidence: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25275350 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25275350
- inopinatus 6y ago
  Once again, trying to make this topic about you personally doesn’t work, doesn’t validate lazily considered scorn, and won’t validate doubling down on either.
  - Jonnax 6y ago
    lol, you're the one that's trying to say that I said that “no-one should care” I've no idea what your point is. But you do you.
    - inopinatus 6y ago
      Ah, so it was the first case. You have a nice day, then.

Jonnax 6y ago

You're putting words into my mouth. And changing the topic of conversation. I was responding to someone saying that their smart TV was full of adverts and how it's a requirement to block it. Where the convenience of the utility provided is greater than seeing an advert for a film on the menu page. You've flipped it around to vulnerable people being surveilled by corporate/state level actors. Why are Smart TVs singled out here? There's a tons of old Android phones that people use every day with sensitive information that are vulnerable to multiple exploits that will never get a patch. Or Routers that never get a patch from their Vendor especially if it's a whitebox from an ISP and they've replaced it with a newer model. It seems like Smart TVs have urban legends associated with them, I asked previously about the supposed "TV connecting to unsecured WIFI" thing that always comes up and nobody had any evidence: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25275350 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25275350

inopinatus 6y ago
Once again, trying to make this topic about you personally doesn’t work, doesn’t validate lazily considered scorn, and won’t validate doubling down on either.
- Jonnax 6y ago
  lol, you're the one that's trying to say that I said that “no-one should care” I've no idea what your point is. But you do you.
  - inopinatus 6y ago
    Ah, so it was the first case. You have a nice day, then.