You'd think if that was all they recorded for, they would be saying it very loudly to end the speculation that weasel-wording leads to.

> Enough with the knee jerk reactions.

No. Stop minimizing their abuse.

You simply do not say something like “we don’t record continuously” if the reality is that you only record when voice control or speech to text is active. Given the entire industry’s track record, the only sane thing to do when confronted with weasel wording is to assume the truth is the worst possible interpretation that isn’t a blatant lie, and even then, sometimes it is just a blatant lie.

Here’s some examples:

- We don’t record continuously -> We record nearly all the time, only stopping to upload the recording.

- We do not sell your data -> But we do “share” it.

- All your data is protected from unauthorized LLM scraping -> But we define all the big tech companies as authorized scraping.

None of that requires recording and has been done with embedded hw with local software for years.

Enough with the corporate shilling. Go back to your manufacturer for a factory reset

Find one person who when asked if you they want the useful feature of LG always recording everything they watch on their TVs and selling that data to third parties without giving anything in return would answer yes.

I get the voice commands but it shouldn't be possible for them to always record everything anyone in the vicinity says without explicitly activating the command (and it should be impossible to hack it, i.e. it should be implemented in hardware not buggy software)

Recording is not the same as listening