alt Hacker NewsWhilst it's preaching to the choir, I would attribute 50% of the blame to Microsoft. Loading any old thing and running it is not very responsible.
Replies
Microsoft doesn't police IHVs -> Geeks: "MS is negligent!"
Microsoft does police IHVs -> Geeks: "MS is an evil monopolist!"
It’s as if nothing was learned from AutoRun CDs and the like.
No, this is LG making a choice to abuse an OS feature in order to shove ads down people's throats and spy on them.
What a dirty, scummy move. Never buying an LG product again.
(Also a Linux user, so this doesn't affect me, but this is gross.)
I have an LG TV that I've never allowed to connect to a network, and I'm definitely keeping it that way.
50% is a bit much. People do expect their hardware to just work. That means installing drivers and the like. And the act here is so egregious that I can't imagine being an LG engineer and living with the shame of being so incredibly despicable.
I'm disappointed with Microsoft, I'm incensed at LG.
The difference is you can remove the LG adware without any serious downsides. Removing auto-installing drivers would have serious downsides for the average person (meaning not cyberspace experts on forums such as this).
Over/under on the use of coinstallers as a mechanism with a "special" USB stick with a certain VID/PID pair to download a Microsoft-sanctioned "break into this machine" driver?
... to maybe go with that Yellowkey Bitlocker bypass?
Tinfoil hats, I know.
I'd argue closer 75%. Vendor abuse of this is hardly restricted to monitors, even if this is one of the more egregious cases.