I get what you’re saying, but I think that’s a distinction that’s lost on most people, including many device makers.
In practice, “smart” is applied so ubiquitously that I think it’s losing meaning as anything other than a pure marketing term. Just like everything was an iProduct for a while, after we wised up to the wonders of all the eThings.
In this case, the woman clearly had no expectation that the device would phone home with her usage habits, so the “smart” moniker was meaningless to her (in that sense). After all, how “smart” does a vibrator need to be? What possible benefit to her could there be from telling the manufacturer when and how she uses it?
This kind of data collection is almost always purely for the benefit of the vendor. If it was a feature that their customers actually wanted, you can be sure they’d be crowing about how their “patented deep-learning algorithms run on next-generation hardware at a secure location to enhance your pleasure.” The fact that they bury it in the fine print of a shrink-wrapped EULA tells you all you need to know, in my opinion.
That said, I’m a bit of a language prescriptivist myself, so I sympathize. Words have meaning, dammit! ![]()