zlacker

>>hliyan+(OP)
I know this is the sort of story HN would love to be true (and to be clear, I think ads on appliances are Black Mirror level stuff), but this — like most things on Reddit — is made up. [1]

This story, while fun to discuss, should be flagged, and not on the FP of HN.

[1] >>46171868

>>jader2+zK
Someone predicted this exact thing is your evidence it's fiction?

How much meaningful experience do you have with psychosis and mental illness?

>>grayha+kL
That thread goes into how Samsung has confirmed that this ad can’t show up like it did [1]. There are many comments in that thread debunking this. Which is why I linked the whole thread, not a single comment.

When something posts something on Reddit that sounds far fetched (fun to believe, but unlikely), we (the HN community) should default to skepticism/critical thinking, rather than assuming it’s true without evidence that it is.

[1] >>46173338

>>jader2+SL
>has confirmed that this ad can’t show up like it did

While this certainly may be true, I trust companies to tell the actual truth about this when it's been verified by an independent 3rd party.

So much of the "This can't happen", "We didn't scan and save all your wireless network names", "We didn't copy all the contacts in your address book" quite commonly break down later when it is realized that some sub-group doing an A/B test or keeping their work somewhat hidden actually did the thing in question.