On 10/03/2017 23:15, John Rumm wrote:
On 10/03/2017 18:42, dennis@home wrote:
On 10/03/2017 18:33, John Rumm wrote:
On 10/03/2017 13:55, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Adam Funk wrote:
If the TV can be voice controlled, it must be able to separate speech
in the room from stuff coming out of the TV itself, right?

Think there's a difference from recognising a clear command to
understanding all speech.


Unlike for voice command processing, the TV does not need to understand
the "bugged" speech - only upload it.



The TVs tend not to understand the speech and do the same as apple and
M$ ie. the upload it to a server for recognition.

Most of them seem to do a bit of trigger processing, so they know when
to start uploading, then do the grunt work in the cloud.

So if you want to listen in you can hack the server as long as the user
is using the voice recognition.
If they have disabled voice recognition in the menus then you need to
hack the TV.

Which was the object of the exercise being discussed I thought?


That's good because that's what I thought too.
So going by ARW and TNP you must be wrong too.

I like the way tim posts saying that you can't hide from being seen on
the router and snips the bits where I say how it can be done.
I suppose that's the way it goes, some just like to pretend they know
about things.