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

Samsung remotely disables TVs looted from South African warehouse

news.samsung.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

401–410 of 727 posts

Re: Samsung remotely disables TVs looted from South African warehouse

#401

Post by 1-6 »

Razengan wrote: post #24
toomuchtodo wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At least they’re not scanning your media library against a list of hashes yet. Edit: Ahh, I see from the replies I have had my fill of curiosity for the day.

Samsung does shit much worse than that, like TVs listening in on everything: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21657930 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21899491 https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baseband_processor#Security_... https://www.fsf.org/blogs/community/replicant-developers-fin...

I've recently purchased the Frame and if you don't connect it to the network, you'll get a pesky warning message every time. Fortunately I'm using ASUS-Merlin and that firmware has intricate controls to control access to the internet.

Re: Samsung remotely disables TVs looted from South African warehouse

#402

Post by Arrath »

francisofascii wrote: post #352
tyingq wrote: post #298

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My non-tech extended family members all use separate Roku and/or FireTV devices instead of the built-in TV functionality, because I've seen the devices. I don't know why, but they do.

Maybe because the Roku interface actually works properly, whereas the apps on the smart TV are slow and buggy.

Very much this. I use the Netflix app on my smart TV as it mostly works without issue. Hulu stops with a black screen every few minutes. I haven't bothered to look to see if it has Disney+ or HBOmax apps, I just use my phone and chromecast to do anything other than Netflix.

Re: Samsung remotely disables TVs looted from South African warehouse

#403

Post by 1-6 »

nate_meurer wrote: post #173

I'd love to hear folks' recommendations for non-smart TV's. I haven't paid attention to this topic in a while and I haven't kept up with the technology.

You can always buy a large monitor. For example, AORUS FO48U 48" gaming monitor has 4K OLED, 120Hz, 1ms G2G Freesync Premium for $1400. https://slickdeals.net/f/15210775-aorus-fo48u-gaming-monitor...

Re: Samsung remotely disables TVs looted from South African warehouse

#404

Post by 1-6 »

kunagi7 wrote: post #16

Unless Samsung enforces an internet connection on the first start of the TV it's completely useless as long as they don't connect it. Still, a worrisome approach. After a few years if they shut down or change the blocking servers will the TV still work or it will become a brick since it can't check its authenticity?

They do on The Frame series TVs because it's supposed to show 'artwork'. If you don't connect, you'll constantly have to deal with an ugly warning message instead of defaulting to the preloaded images.

Re: Samsung remotely disables TVs looted from South African warehouse

#405

Post by beebeepka »

Aspos wrote: post #141
criddell wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For now, that works. It's easy to imagine a time when the TV includes it's own 5G modem or that Samsung would make a deal with Amazon or Comcast for access to their wifi mesh networks so the TV can get online without user intervention.

I once moved across the ocean and newly purchased LG TV refused to work because I am now in the wrong region. Off it went to a landfill, this perfect piece of hardware :-(

Refused to work on what way?

Re: Samsung remotely disables TVs looted from South African warehouse

#406

Post by haunter »

pessimizer wrote: post #325
arduinomancer wrote: post #287

This thread feels very...Hacker News Bubble? Why is everyone so confused that smart TVs are popular? Being able to just turn on your TV and open Netflix without messing around with inputs/other devices is a huge benefit for non-technological people. And it probably costs <$50 for the manufacturer to include whatever chip is running linux in the TV, its a no-brainer.

> Why is everyone so confused that smart TVs are popular? Also the real reason that they're popular: there are no non-smart TVs available.

There are, they are called monitors

Re: Samsung remotely disables TVs looted from South African warehouse

#407

Post by Beldin »

pmontra wrote: post #354
echlebek wrote: post #337

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Gigabyte have a 48" 'monitor' now (an LG panel with Displayport 1.4 and no smart features)

Yes, but TVs and monitors have different purposes and it shows. A quick summary at https://thewiredshopper.com/tv-vs-monitor/

TL;DR:

- If you want a certain display tech (qled, oled, ...), you don't need this guide.

- otherwise: there is no difference. pick whatever screen has the size and ports you care about.

I expected something like distance (several m for tv, .5m for monitor), but that goes unmentioned. I guess size+resolution already cover this.

Re: Samsung remotely disables TVs looted from South African warehouse

#408

Post by bellyfullofbac »

gruez wrote: post #295
bellyfullofbac wrote: post #239

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The illegality is also inconvenient, but how likely are the cops or whoever are going to inconvenience them about that? For the bandits the disabled TVs is no big deal because they'll probably manage to sell them to "bargain hunters" anyway.

The point is to make it harder for the bandits to offload their goods, by ruining their resale value. If someone's selling cheap TVs off the back of a truck, and you know that you'll get to keep it (as in netherlands, see sibling comments), then there's no real incentive for you not to buy it. Who wouldn't want a 75" OLED TV for $1000, no strings attached? On the other hand, if the law was that stolen property was li…

Yeah yeah yeah, but this is S. Africa, a place where laws aren't automatically obeyed, unlike e.g. Singapore. If there is your law, my guess is getting caught "buying stolen goods" is probably not something many people there worry about. Sure there will be straight and narrow citizens, but my guess is, without the disable-tech, the bandits wouldn't really have a problem getting rid of their stolen goods. Even with this tech, my hunch is those TVs will still sell, but at least now the crippling will be a lesson for their bargain-hunting buyers.

Re: Samsung remotely disables TVs looted from South African warehouse

#409

Post by MichaelZuo »

kazinator wrote: post #231
MichaelZuo wrote: post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you not believe in property rights? If a stolen car gets resold that doesn’t automatically void the original ownership papers… and that’s the standard practice in every country in the world I think.

The standard practice in most countries is that the police and the court system are distinct from this entity called Samsung.

That doesn’t affect the principle that the original ownership rights cannot be affected by any subsequent resale after theft.

Re: Samsung remotely disables TVs looted from South African warehouse

#410

Post by prepend »

rightbyte wrote: post #71
prepend wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is not to firmware though. Is there an OSS firmware that can be used to replace whatever crap Samsung has on these devices?

It is quite pointless to fight hardware vendors for FOSS support if they don't want to and you don't have to. Why spend effort to crack their platform when you can buy from competitors, which you do a disservice for fixing Samsungs TVs. Then again I don't know if there are any 'dumb' or open software competitor TVs left on the market ...

It works quite well for WiFi router hardware.
Post reply on HN