Submitted 1 day ago by BrikoX@lemmy.zip to technology@lemmy.zip
The smart vacuum cleaner was remotely bricked for not collecting data.
In case you have a robot vacuum and want to run it cloudless you can check Valetudo.
It’s been running my vacuum the last 4 years and I couldn’t find any downsides (There are several extra functions if you like to tinker around with home assistant and the likes)
If you have any doubts or need assistance with installing it, I would be happy to give you a hand :-)
Conversely, instead of blocking the data transfer, have it send false data. Maybe a few drop table inserts.
Spam them so hard they’ll blacklist your device
I do this when a job makes me install productivity tracking software. Surprisingly easy to gin up fake screenshots and JSON of your activities and inject it into the program. All it does is upload the records from a user folder every X minutes
behavioral surplus is the most important thing for corporations in 21st century. Simple as that. They basically collect people’s personal data, where they go, their routines and stuff, and render them and use them for efficient advertising. Google is the founder of this system.
Catoblepas@piefed.blahaj.zone 1 day ago
Having someone use a remote kill command for an item you bought for reasons other than imminent threats to safety ought to be illegal. This shouldn’t be treated differently from a car salesman bricking your windshield after you drive off the lot.
MonkderVierte@lemmy.zip 16 hours ago
In germany there’s the “Computer sabotage” crime.
reddit_sux@lemmy.world 48 minutes ago
Is it still sabotage if the only thing they have sold is a license to use their product not the product itself. That is still their property.
KairuByte@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 day ago
The issue you’ll run into is that the data runs through their servers, and you ages to let them kill it off. Should that be legal? I honestly don’t know. But they shouldn’t force you to use their servers to begin with, which would make the entire issue moot.