Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

What Vizio was doing behind the TV screen

ftc.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 340 posts

Re: What Vizio was doing behind the TV screen

#41

Post by passivepinetree »

Narkov wrote: post #26
passivepinetree wrote: post #15

The amount of money they made from that data is probably orders of magnitude more than the paltry $2.2 million penalty. I hate to get all paranoid, but it seems like every day there's news of a company's data being hacked, and what information isn't being hacked is being actively sold. What can an average citizen do (short of living Ron Swanson-style in a cabin in the woods) to protect their privacy?

"orders of magnitude more" ? As in, ~$200m? No chance. With a little bit of industry knowledge, I would posit that they made roughly the same quantum as the fine.

Can you elaborate on your industry knowledge? I'm not in the industry so I'm curious. I would guess that Vizio would have been able to demand a premium for that data.

Re: What Vizio was doing behind the TV screen

#42

Post by JohnBooty »

If nobody's started one yet, I think there would be an audience for a blog/vlog/whatever that reviews non-smart TVs. And/or a place that evaluates which "smart" TVs function acceptably as "dumb" when they are not connected to a network.

Realistically, this would have to include evaluating things beside consumer TVs for use as living room devices, since "smart" features in consumer TVs are nearly unavoidable at this point.

Because I'm going to have to start looking into the world of commercial displays for my next TV, I guess. At least I think those don't have "smart" features. Yet?

Re: What Vizio was doing behind the TV screen

#43

Post by ceejayoz »

wrsh07 wrote: post #36
jasonwilk wrote: post #21

It's not worth buying any of these 'Smart' TVs. I don't know whether it is a shoddy developer experience provided by the likes of Samsung / Vizeo etc or if it's the developers themselves (Hulu I'm looking at you) who do not maintain their apps which are constantly bug filled. I much prefer my old dumb TV that has a Roku plugged into it. Oh yeah, and I know it's not WATCHING ME.

If you want a high end tv you don't have much choice. But also, why do you not expect your Roku / apple tv / etc to be watching you?

> If you want a high end tv you don't have much choice.

Don't connect it to the Internet? Barring the manufacturer sneaking a backup cellular modem in there, seems like it's an easy fix.

Re: What Vizio was doing behind the TV screen

#44

Post by xanderstrike »

kevin_b_er wrote: post #25

This is why you do not use a smart TV: Nefarious data collection on what you watch and Samsungs are known to demand to show ads or else. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13585132 https://www.extremetech.com/electronics/241500-samsung-smart... http://www.techtimes.com/articles/190222/20161227/samsung-sm... I'm also, for political reasons, suspicious of the FTC's willingness to pursue such cases in the future.

Can you recommend a 50" 1080p tv that isn't "smart"? I've been shopping for a new one and I strongly suspect they don't exist.

Re: What Vizio was doing behind the TV screen

#45

Post by cityhall »

elorant wrote: post #29
passivepinetree wrote: post #15

The amount of money they made from that data is probably orders of magnitude more than the paltry $2.2 million penalty. I hate to get all paranoid, but it seems like every day there's news of a company's data being hacked, and what information isn't being hacked is being actively sold. What can an average citizen do (short of living Ron Swanson-style in a cabin in the woods) to protect their privacy?

Build a blacklist of companies that adopt such policies and boycott the shit out of them.

The problem is virtually every company is on the list for one reason or another. Sony's rootkit for example.

Re: What Vizio was doing behind the TV screen

#46

Post by bduerst »

wrsh07 wrote: post #36
jasonwilk wrote: post #21

It's not worth buying any of these 'Smart' TVs. I don't know whether it is a shoddy developer experience provided by the likes of Samsung / Vizeo etc or if it's the developers themselves (Hulu I'm looking at you) who do not maintain their apps which are constantly bug filled. I much prefer my old dumb TV that has a Roku plugged into it. Oh yeah, and I know it's not WATCHING ME.

If you want a high end tv you don't have much choice. But also, why do you not expect your Roku / apple tv / etc to be watching you?

You can still find OLED or 4K off-brand "dumb" TVs, like from Hisense and Selki, but you run the risk of terrible support.

Re: What Vizio was doing behind the TV screen

#48

Post by tracker1 »

JohnBooty wrote: post #42

If nobody's started one yet, I think there would be an audience for a blog/vlog/whatever that reviews non-smart TVs. And/or a place that evaluates which "smart" TVs function acceptably as "dumb" when they are not connected to a network. Realistically, this would have to include evaluating things beside consumer TVs for use as living room devices, since "smart" features in consumer TVs are nearly unavoidable at this p…

Personally, I'd be pretty happy with very high quality monitor-only sets... I mostly run everything through my AVR anyways. Though some of the smart tv options are getting compelling, I tend to find the integrated devices are always a letdown after a couple years.

Re: What Vizio was doing behind the TV screen

#49

Post by guscost »

I got a supposedly "smart" TV at a ludicrous price the other day, maybe because there are already surplus units that nobody wants? It's a Roku/Sharp combo thing so there are no numbers on the remote either, but the UI is actually pretty darn good.

And no, I would never connect my cheapo TV to the Internet. Come on.

Re: What Vizio was doing behind the TV screen

#50

Post by swsieber »

JohnBooty wrote: post #42

If nobody's started one yet, I think there would be an audience for a blog/vlog/whatever that reviews non-smart TVs. And/or a place that evaluates which "smart" TVs function acceptably as "dumb" when they are not connected to a network. Realistically, this would have to include evaluating things beside consumer TVs for use as living room devices, since "smart" features in consumer TVs are nearly unavoidable at this p…

I'd also like non-smart Blu-ray players. Well, speaking over HDMI is okay, but no internet crap.
Post reply on HN