Whoops! Are you sure that you want to disable data collection on your TV? Walmart, Roku, and other TV companies sure would love for you not to. It may mean m...
Why would you pick the small battery operated device that gets lost under couch cushions when you can put a mic in the big thing that is plugged in 24/7 and by design has a central and open placement in a room?
Why not put an active listening device in your bank card? Why not secretly sew it into your clothes.
I’m not saying there can’t be one in the remote, it’s just that the TV itself is a much better option; always has power, doesn’t rely on chemical batteries, doesn’t need to maximize battery life, (typically) placed with open facing to a room (for clear and consistent audio.
Sure, you can put an always-on listening device on the remote, but you’re gonna use more battery to power it, you’re gonna need more hardware to handle communication to the TV, and more battery to power that. It’s a pretty big compromise for a device that is supposed to go years without changing the batteries. All that trouble to put one in the remote when you can/probably have one in the TV already, and then then remote gets stuck in the couch cushions, or put in a drawer, or lost, or replaced with a different remote. It just doesn’t make sense to me to put that kind of effort into what will inevitably be an unreliable and inconsistent spying device.
I guess well have to start mapping TV models with microphones and drown them in silicon or something
It’s usually in the remote.
Sony put a mic in both. It has a switch to “turn off” the mic on the TV but IIRC the TOS says right up top they’re still listening.
Cheap universal learning remotes don’t have mics, that helps a little.
Seems like a terrible place for an active listening device.
Not really. It’s closer to people than the TV is.
Why would you pick the small battery operated device that gets lost under couch cushions when you can put a mic in the big thing that is plugged in 24/7 and by design has a central and open placement in a room?
Why not both?
Apparently that’s what some of them are doing.
Why not put an active listening device in your bank card? Why not secretly sew it into your clothes.
I’m not saying there can’t be one in the remote, it’s just that the TV itself is a much better option; always has power, doesn’t rely on chemical batteries, doesn’t need to maximize battery life, (typically) placed with open facing to a room (for clear and consistent audio.
Sure, you can put an always-on listening device on the remote, but you’re gonna use more battery to power it, you’re gonna need more hardware to handle communication to the TV, and more battery to power that. It’s a pretty big compromise for a device that is supposed to go years without changing the batteries. All that trouble to put one in the remote when you can/probably have one in the TV already, and then then remote gets stuck in the couch cushions, or put in a drawer, or lost, or replaced with a different remote. It just doesn’t make sense to me to put that kind of effort into what will inevitably be an unreliable and inconsistent spying device.