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

321–330 of 340 posts

Re: What Vizio was doing behind the TV screen

#321

Post by Shorel »

criley2 wrote: post #309
antisthenes wrote: post #293

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't understand why someone just doesn't hook up their TV with their computer via HDMI or DP. Is switching sources too complicated for people? Even the shittiest Dell boxes these days have 2 video outputs, I believe, so you can run 1 monitor + TV. Most laptops have an extra video out port too. That way you can actually type on your keyboard when you search youtube, unlike typing with god forbid, a remote or an xbo…

Because a full desktop UI is vastly inferior to a simple remote interface if you don't have a full mouse/kbb available, and having to have a mouse/kbb to, I don't know, pick a movie is very lame from a couch user perspective. Because you can get 4K/HDR with regularly updated high quality third party apps like Netflix from Roku for $80 with hardware that can handle it/ But a Media PC running Windows would require you…

Install Kodi, use the wireless gamepad as the remote control.

Problem solved, no money spent, best of both worlds.

Re: What Vizio was doing behind the TV screen

#322

Post by chris_wot »

compuguy wrote: post #314
chris_wot wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm amazed you can access Netflix behind a VPN.

Heck if your using a tunnel broker for ipv6, it thinks your using a vpn, sigh .

That sort of makes sense, given that is also punching through the geoblock.

Re: What Vizio was doing behind the TV screen

#323

Post by FullMtlAlcoholc »

OkGoDoIt wrote: post #179
FullMtlAlcoholc wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is why i torrent behind a VPN despite being subscribed to HBO now, Netflix, and Amazon Video. My guilt is ameliorated and at least a sliver of ny privacy is maintained.

I thought Netflix and related services work the same way Spotify does: they pay content providers a small fee based on actual content viewing. If you pay Netflix a monthly subscription but never view any content on your account, I would assume Netflix keeps all of the revenue and doesn't pay out anything to the actual content providers. Just a guess, but it's possible your plan is backfiring by paying the company you…

> your plan is backfiring by paying the company you don't want to support (since Netflix is the one implementing the tracking) instead of the companies you do (that actually create the content you like).

TBH, that's for too deep for my moral calculus. The only things I view/pirate from Netflix are Netflix original series and PBS documentaries/educational programs. I'm paying the former directly and the latter isn't really out to maximize profit but to enlighten and educate and it's somewhat supported by my tax dollars.

Re: What Vizio was doing behind the TV screen

#324

Post by FullMtlAlcoholc »

webXL wrote: post #279
spangry wrote: post #258

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Me neither, but it seems like we haven't even come close to the limit of what people will tolerate. For example, Johnson & Johnson has/had an insulin pump on the market that could easily be triggered remotely (i.e. be used to remotely murder you): http://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/10/05/animas_diabetes_pump... And their response was basically "yeah, it's not that big of a deal, don't worry about it". Someone with rea…

Someone would really, really have to have it out for diabetic geeks for this to be plausible. The scary stuff I worry about is what an evil scientist, like the one from 12 monkeys, could do with a deadly virus. This type of evil gets more far more "bang for the buck". I guess both are equally plausible. I might worry more about your scenario if I were diabetic!

> Someone would really, really have to have it out for diabetic geeks for this to be plausible.

I disagree. The remote and disconnected nature of this renders it less real than say killing a person with a knife. You don't have to witness first hand the yelling, screaming, pleading, suffering, etc. and finally the moment when a person sublimates from a living, breathing, unique being to a lifeless husk. It's like pushing a button to kill someone...it can be so far away that it's not quite real.

When I was younger, I spent time on 4chan's /b/ and could see some of the more deranged+immature members of the community doing things like this for the lulz or using some half-baked logic rooted in 20th century eugenics. Example A: Individuals like Dylan Roof who don't understand statistics and the context around it (I watched the entirety of his interrogation and he's borderline mentally challenged or autistic)

Re: What Vizio was doing behind the TV screen

#325

Post by FullMtlAlcoholc »

alkonaut wrote: post #208
FullMtlAlcoholc wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't understand the consumer infatuation with "smart", Internet connected devices, especially smart homes. Yes auto lighting and hvac systems are cool, but it introduces so many security vulnerabities that it's not worth it. I dont ever see myself using autonomous, internet connected cars. I cant think of a bigger hacking target for terrorists and mischief makers alike.

The "SmartTV" isn't really smart (nor is anything to be honest). The SmartTV is just a smartphone type hardware built into the TV so the kids can Watch netflix and you don't need a second box + remote to do it. I find that pretty compelling actually.

> The "SmartTV" isn't really smart (nor is anything to be honest). The SmartTV is just a smartphone type hardware built into the TV

By definition, this is what makes it smart. It's not the sophistication of the embedded hardware, it's the connectivity. The Echo Dot isn't anything special (and a bit overpriced IMHO). Wifi, Bluetooth Radio, 3.5mm audio out, decent mic, speakers about as good as free swag portable speakers, etc.

Re: What Vizio was doing behind the TV screen

#326

Post by FullMtlAlcoholc »

pbhjpbhj wrote: post #247
FullMtlAlcoholc wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Quick tip: If you actually care about being downvoted, dont complain about being downvoted. Many people will do so just for mentioning it, it is against the rules, and it's whining about imaginary, non-transferrable internet points

Personally I think it's fine to complain about being downvoted if no-one has responded constructively. It might not help, of course. Moreover, without vote visibility you can't tell if the reason given by one person is supported by others.

> Personally I think it's fine to complain about being downvoted if no-one has responded constructively.

I understand that often often times people will use downvotes as a substitute for disagreeing, despite that being explicitly against its true function. Ultimately, you're complaining about fictitious karma points.

If you are a regular contributor who follows the rules, over time your karma will accrue and this can be a fuzzy way to weigh your importance to the community. The danger of valuing karma too much will cause the system to be gamed by marketers and astroturfers (see Reddit for Example A)

Re: What Vizio was doing behind the TV screen

#327

Post by FullMtlAlcoholc »

kakarot wrote: post #241
deadbunny wrote: post #229

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> as the data could be collected by a car driving by, or via your neighborers Wifi. What? How is it going to connect to your neighbours wifi? How is someone driving past going to connect to your TV? Is the TV going to set itself up as an access point? I'm completely behind not connecting random devices in my house to the internet but suggesting they are somehow trying to get data out by connecting to random networks…

Multiple compromised nodes working together to identify you. We already see this with things like ultrasonic communication. A compromised (has sketchy app installed) phone could, for example, communicate with your television or computer speakers and mic via ultrasonic frequencies to determine what ads you have seen, or what digital streaming content you are consuming. An app could take it even a step further and use…

It doesn't even require anything that complex. If I remember correctly, even if your smartphone never connects to wifi AP's, while thhe WiFi radio is on, it does periodically scan for AP's in the area while either surrendering some identifiable information or establishing a pattern that can be used to identify you.

Frak it, TV is going in a Faraday cage

Re: What Vizio was doing behind the TV screen

#328

Post by FullMtlAlcoholc »

pnutjam wrote: post #307
dx034 wrote: post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because Netflix blocks VPNs since a few months. It's really hard to find a vpn that works with netflix. Even setting up your own won't work, most ip ranges that are used by data centres are blocked by default.

He said he pays for Netflix, but torrents on a VPN.

That's a bingo!

Re: What Vizio was doing behind the TV screen

#329

Post by edaemon »

criley2 wrote: post #319
edaemon wrote: post #312

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's going to get more and more difficult to find a "dumb" TV. Almost all medium and high quality TVs are "smart" TVs now. It costs TV manufacturers very little to add "smart" functionality and it brings in a lot of customers. I think it's more pragmatic to look for a TV that suits your needs, including any tracking, advertising, etc. Some platforms let you turn it off and others don't -- e.g. Samsung's smart TVs sho…

Harder but certainly not impossible. IMO you and others choosing to patronize overpriced and pointless smart systems is why it is becoming harder to find. If even the people who care don't care, then sure, they'll surcharge $100+ on every model happily. For what it's worth, my dumb Vizio was found in a stack of 20+ at a local Target during Black Friday. They were literally stacked at the entrance to the store. I coul…

That doesn't make much sense -- if I'm unable to find a product to meet my needs with a particular attribute, I'm going to buy one that meets my needs despite not having the attribute. In fact, the TV I got is the closest I could get to a dumb TV. It just has a Chromecast built into it.

Is your dumb Vizio a 4k TV? From my research, there was not a single 4k TV from a reputable brand that did not have some "smart" features.

Re: What Vizio was doing behind the TV screen

#330

Post by pbhjpbhj »

FullMtlAlcoholc wrote: post #326
pbhjpbhj wrote: post #247

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Personally I think it's fine to complain about being downvoted if no-one has responded constructively. It might not help, of course. Moreover, without vote visibility you can't tell if the reason given by one person is supported by others.

> Personally I think it's fine to complain about being downvoted if no-one has responded constructively. I understand that often often times people will use downvotes as a substitute for disagreeing, despite that being explicitly against its true function. Ultimately, you're complaining about fictitious karma points. If you are a regular contributor who follows the rules, over time your karma will accrue and this can…

>people will use downvotes as a substitute for disagreeing, despite that being explicitly against its true function. //

Early on with HN pg stated that downvoting for disagreement was proper behaviour on HN. My opinion is that's wrong but, in contrast to other fora, downvoting to disagree is thus explicitly a part of proper behaviour here.

That said, I don't care about the points, it's a matter of social value - if you don't know why people are disagreeing then you can't address that concern or reassess your own position, the downvoted adds no value whilst a comment may.

Post reply on HN