I was told a while ago about cell phones and Smart TV's recording your personal data without your knowledge. That really didn't surprise me. I ran into the following artcle this morning on the TV's.

Facebook.com/Samsung TV

Samsung has confirmed that its "smart TV" sets are listening to customers' every word, and the company is warning customers not to speak about personal information while near the TV sets.

The company revealed that the voice activation feature on its smart TVs will capture all nearby conversations. The TV sets can share the information, including sensitive data, with Samsung as well as third-party services.

The news comes after Shane Harris at The Daily Beast pointed out a troubling line in Samsung's privacy policy: "Please be aware that if your spoken words include personal or other sensitive information, that information will be among the data captured and transmitted to a third party."

Samsung has now issued a new statement clarifying how the voice activation feature works. "If a consumer consents and uses the voice recognition feature, voice data is provided to a third party during a requested voice command search," Samsung said in a statement. "At that time, the voice data is sent to a server, which searches for the requested content then returns the desired content to the TV."

The company added that it does not retain or sell the voice data, but it didn't name the third party that translates users' speech. Meghan DeMaria

of course they are

That's why I refuse to buy one of these TVs. I still have my old "box" tvs and will not buy a flat screen until all of my old ones bite the dust, which could be years. I have a Sony, an RCA and a Sylvania, all of which work perfectly well. I don't need all those bells and whistles of the newfangled flat screens, and I certainly don't want my privacy invaded by these BIG BROTHER tvs. Hell, I'm suspect of the damn DVD player and cable box. I sometimes hear a suspicious beeping sound coming from the cable box, which makes me believe there some spyware installed or something.

from:

http://www.newsweek.com/privacy-fears-over-samsungs-orwellian-smart-tv-305532

Privacy Fears Over Samsung’s ‘Orwellian’ Smart TV

BY CATHERINE PHILLIPS 2/9/15 AT 1:28 PM

“Please be aware that if your spoken words include personal or other sensitive information, that information will be among the data captured and transmitted to a third party,” Samsung warns.

Samsung says the voice recognition feature, which allows you to control the TV with vocal prompts, provides a convenient service to their customers and the company have pointed out that it can be deactivated at any time.

. . .

Professor Mike Jackson, a cyber security expert at Birmingham City University’s Business School, suggest that the audio data might be used for security purposes. “Perhaps the government would like to access the information the television collects so that it can better identify dissident individuals and use it as a tool to combat terrorism,” he said in a statement released by the university.

He also warned of the negative effects of storing this data: “It’s important to remember here how much information Sony lost to hackers. Could we see this happening again?” Sony Pictures was hit by a major cyber-attack in December in which hackers, protesting the controversial film The Interview for its depiction of North Korean president Kim Jong-un, released thousands of the company’s confidential documents to the public.

from:

http://www.cnet.com/news/samsung-changes-smarttv-privacy-policy-in-wake-of-spying-fears/

Samsung changes Smart TV privacy policy in wake of spying fears

by Chris Matyszczyk

February 10, 2015 12:35 PM PST

Should you have a Samsung Smart TV, you may have been practicing sign language or deep whispering whenever someone was using its voice recognition feature.

After all, last week the company's privacy policywas revealed to read, in part: "Please be aware that if your spoken words include personal or other sensitive information, that information will be among the data captured and transmitted to a third party through your use of Voice Recognition."

The wording suggested troubling possibilities. Now Samsung has decided to change its privacy policy to, the company told me, "better explain what actually occurs."

In a blog post titled "Samsung Smart TVs Do Not ...versations," Samsung said that its Smart TVs have two microphones. One is inside the TV set. The other sits inside your remote.

The one in the TV responds to voice commands that are predetermined. The remote microphone, which you can use to find a particular program or type of program "works like most any other voice recognition service available on other products including smartphones and tablets."

But what of the most contentious part of the privacy policy? What of the recording and transmitting of your living-room chatter? What of your personal or other sensitive information?

Samsung has clarified -- and lengthened -- this particular aspect of its privacy policy. It now reads:

If you enable Voice Recognition, you can interact with your Smart TV using your voice. To provide you the Voice Recognition feature, some interactive voice commands may be transmitted (along with information about your device, including device identifiers) to a third-party service provider (currently, Nuance Communications, Inc.) that converts your interactive voice commands to text and to the extent necessary to provide the Voice Recognition features to you. In addition, Samsung may collect and your device may capture voice commands and associated texts so that we can provide you with Voice Recognition features and evaluate and improve the features. Samsung will collect your interactive voice commands only when you make a specific search request to the Smart TV by clicking the activation button either on the remote control or on your screen and speaking into the microphone on the remote control.

Samsung also makes it clear that voice recognition can be disabled, leaving you still with the power to use certain predetermined voice commands. Voice recognition data collection can also be disabled, but then certain features will be disabled with it.

Samsung insists that it uses industry standard encryption to secure the data. The updated privacy wording was, of course, written by lawyers. So it should be held with an outstretched arm in just two fingers for examination.

What remains unclear is whether the microphones can, indeed, capture background living-room conversations. The wording about "personal or other sensitive information" seems to have been removed. But what does this mean? Although Samsung's blog post insists that the software doesn't "monitor" living-room conversation, the question remains whether it does still record it, however inadvertently.

I therefore asked Samsung to explain further and will update, should I hear.

Any digital device with a microphone will surely be able to listen in to anything that's said when the microphone is on.

The drift toward voice recognition and activation is one that people supposedly crave. It's not as if Samsung Smart TVs are alone in providing such a feature. Cars and phones have voice recognition. So does your Xbox One. I contacted both Philips and LG two days ago to ask what their specific smart-TV privacy policies are, but both companies have been worryingly quiet on the subject.

At the heart of your interaction with all these devices is trust.

When it comes to its voice assistant service, for example, Google creates random identifiers to block its servers from knowing that it's you making the voice request.

However professional Nuance Communications is (and it works with many companies such as LG and Panasonic to, for example, turn speech into text), there is always going to be a little doubt. There's certainly a question as to what happens once Samsung has passed your data to Nuance.

Nuance's privacy policy says, for example: "By using Nuance products and services, you acknowledge, consent and agree that Nuance may collect, process, and use the information that you provide to us and that such information shall only be used by Nuance or third parties acting under the direction of Nuance, pursuant to confidentiality agreements, to develop, tune, enhance, and improve Nuance services and products." Further in the privacy policy is a reference to data use for "advertising and marketing."

I have contacted Nuance to ask whether it feels able to pass voice data information -- in whatever form -- obtained via Samsung Smart TVs to third parties. I will update, should I hear.

Personally, I'm very happy to shout at my TV once in awhile (Go Warriors, etc.) without feeling the need to talk to it to find a show to watch.

Every time you commit any kind of data to digital technology, there's the possibility of recording and/or storing. As more and more data is being emitted, there are more and more permutations of that data out there. Equally, there is an increased potential for error, carelessness or subterfuge.

We take the risk to give ourselves more amusement and convenience. We trust that our data will be used only for good and, hopefully, discarded when there's no further use for it.

Actually, the truth is, we don't think about it at all. We just want the amusement and convenience.

Yah know, my former LG used to take pictures by itself. Made me wonder if someone hacked it via an app on the phone. That was kinda scary to think that someone could be spying on me right under my nose.

I wonder how paranoid schizophernics deal with this. I mean it's real, their paranoia is justified.

Me, I've grown use to the idea, I have no privacy. If folks want to look at me with my morning hair, munching on cheetos then have at it, their life is pretty frekkin' boring if you ask me.

morningsong said:

I wonder how paranoid schizophernics deal with this. I mean it's real, their paranoia is justified.

Me, I've grown use to the idea, I have no privacy. If folks want to look at me with my morning hair, munching on cheetos then have at it, their life is pretty frekkin' boring if you ask me.

It doesn't matter how boring it is or is not. It's YOURS and should not be invaded.

Graycap23 said:

morningsong said:

I wonder how paranoid schizophernics deal with this. I mean it's real, their paranoia is justified.

Me, I've grown use to the idea, I have no privacy. If folks want to look at me with my morning hair, munching on cheetos then have at it, their life is pretty frekkin' boring if you ask me.

It doesn't matter how boring it is or is not. It's YOURS and should not be invaded.

The solution? Be a hemit? What? Eventually all the old stuff with break and go away, like it always has and then you're left with the new nosy a$$ed people being nosy stuff. I get laughed at because I still have a dial phone in my kitchen, I like it. I'm about as computer savvy with these devices as I am being a carpenter with a hammer.

morningsong said:

Graycap23 said:

It doesn't matter how boring it is or is not. It's YOURS and should not be invaded.

The solution? Be a hemit? What? Eventually all the old stuff with break and go away, like it always has and then you're left with the new nosy a$$ed people being nosy stuff. I get laughed at because I still have a dial phone in my kitchen, I like it. I'm about as computer savvy with these devices as I am being a carpenter with a hammer.

The solution?

The masses need 2 take a stand against these lunatics that think they can do what ever they choose.

Graycap23 said:

morningsong said:

The solution? Be a hemit? What? Eventually all the old stuff with break and go away, like it always has and then you're left with the new nosy a$$ed people being nosy stuff. I get laughed at because I still have a dial phone in my kitchen, I like it. I'm about as computer savvy with these devices as I am being a carpenter with a hammer.

The solution?

The masses need 2 take a stand against these lunatics that think they can do what ever they choose.

I can agree with that, never would ever suggest being a limp noodle, only general protesting (in and of itself) doesn't seem to work anymore.

morningsong said:

Graycap23 said:

It doesn't matter how boring it is or is not. It's YOURS and should not be invaded.

The solution? Be a hemit? What? Eventually all the old stuff with break and go away, like it always has and then you're left with the new nosy a$$ed people being nosy stuff. I get laughed at because I still have a dial phone in my kitchen, I like it. I'm about as computer savvy with these devices as I am being a carpenter with a hammer.

The solution?

Don't buy one.

PurpleJedi said:

morningsong said:

The solution? Be a hemit? What? Eventually all the old stuff with break and go away, like it always has and then you're left with the new nosy a$$ed people being nosy stuff. I get laughed at because I still have a dial phone in my kitchen, I like it. I'm about as computer savvy with these devices as I am being a carpenter with a hammer.

The solution?

Don't buy one.

I hear you. But that was my original point. Eventually that's all there is to have. Then it becomes a matter of peer pressure, status symbols, which seem to be getting more intense, I've got to have the lastest and greatest. How far are people, en masse, really willing to go, beyond the random individual, who basically is seen a cheapskate for not buying?

The solution is not to not buy one it's simply to deactivate this feature if you have concerns.

JustErin said:

The solution is not to not buy one it's simply to deactivate this feature if you have concerns.

If you know how. Learning is forever it seems.


Who are the committees that are going to court to fight these type of invasions? Laws definitely aren't a guarenteed defense based on history but got to start somewhere, imho.

morningsong said:

I wonder how paranoid schizophernics deal with this. I mean it's real, their paranoia is justified.

Me, I've grown use to the idea, I have no privacy. If folks want to look at me with my morning hair, munching on cheetos then have at it, their life is pretty frekkin' boring if you ask me.

you eating cheetos for breakfast? fess up now

morningsong said:

PurpleJedi said:

The solution?

Don't buy one.

I hear you. But that was my original point. Eventually that's all there is to have. Then it becomes a matter of peer pressure, status symbols, which seem to be getting more intense, I've got to have the lastest and greatest. How far are people, en masse, really willing to go, beyond the random individual, who basically is seen a cheapskate for not buying?

I don't see voice-controls as becoming standard fare for televisions.

What I see is a greater emphasis on clearer images & curved screens.

If there DOES come a time when voice controlled smart TV's are the ONLY things that you can buy, then I'm sure that there will be a greater emphasis on user privacy.

As for now...I don't feel sorry for anyone spending the extra $$$ to have a feature that they don't really want. Makes no sense.

if i had one and it was it would jump off the wall in boredom

i have a 26" SDTV that had something wrong with the sceeen....

I love an audience so that would not bother me at all...I'll speak my Cell Number if they're into Sexting..They'll NEVER forget the word Freak for as long as they Live...

PurpleJedi said:

what we will see soon is the same kind of arguments made by anti-gun people that the founders could have never envisioned this so it should not be covered by the first.

I tried to find old post back when the iPad (tablets) was first introduced. The jokes.