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

431–440 of 727 posts

Re: Samsung remotely disables TVs looted from South African warehouse

#431

Post by MereInterest »

tshaddox wrote: post #422
pessimizer wrote: post #325

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

It stretches credulity to suggest that the lack of non-smart TVs on the market causes the popularity of smart TVs. Would you also suggest that the lack of black and white TVs on the market causes the popularity of color TVs?

Does it similarly stretch credulity to suggest that the lack of commercial-free cable channels on the market causes the popularity of cable channels with commercials. Something may be "popular" because it's the only game in town.

Re: Samsung remotely disables TVs looted from South African warehouse

#432

Post by Teever »

tshaddox wrote: post #422
pessimizer wrote: post #325

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

It stretches credulity to suggest that the lack of non-smart TVs on the market causes the popularity of smart TVs. Would you also suggest that the lack of black and white TVs on the market causes the popularity of color TVs?

Why weren't TVs with built in VCRs and DVD players more popular?

Re: Samsung remotely disables TVs looted from South African warehouse

#433

Post by nitrogen »

tfigment wrote: post #417
haunter wrote: post #406

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are, they are called monitors

Monitors generally don't have remote controls or speakers. The latter solved with soundbar but former is important use case.

Monitors also generally don't come in 60"+ sizes, or if they do, they don't have HDR or other modern video display technologies.

Re: Samsung remotely disables TVs looted from South African warehouse

#434

Post by gsich »

Forbo wrote: post #385
savant_penguin wrote: post #381

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just because you disconnected it from wifi does not mean they cannot connect it through lte without your knowledge

See previous discussion about this problem here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27701977 TL;DR- TVs are using their own cellular connections and/or neighboring open wireless networks.

>L;DR- TVs are using their own cellular connections

The link doesn't say that.

Re: Samsung remotely disables TVs looted from South African warehouse

#435

Post by Retric »

tshaddox wrote: post #422
pessimizer wrote: post #325

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

It stretches credulity to suggest that the lack of non-smart TVs on the market causes the popularity of smart TVs. Would you also suggest that the lack of black and white TVs on the market causes the popularity of color TVs?

Smart TV’s are negative costs to the manufacturers as in they get paid more to install them than they actually cost.

Manufacturers therefore have zero incentives to manufacture non smart TV’s.

Re: Samsung remotely disables TVs looted from South African warehouse

#436

Post by ant6n »

bluGill wrote: post #72
ballenf wrote: post #25

The ecological impact of this shouldn't be ignored. Imagine the number of iPhones that are activation locked due to oversight of owners before disposal. They are much more likely to become e-waste. Possession as the primary indicator of ownership isn't such a bad option after all. At the very least, there should be a well-known process to remove these locks.

> The ecological impact of this shouldn't be ignored. Pretty low so long as they only use it for theft. Thieves will soon learn not to steal TVs as there is no value in it. As such it is only a small number of bricked TVs that are landfilled early - nothing compared to all the TVs already landfilled. Now if this is used for something other than theft cases it can get bad, but in this case at least it is a good thing…

Thieves will still steal TV's, they will just end up in panel repair shops. iPhones still get stolen as well, even though they are worth much less.

Re: Samsung remotely disables TVs looted from South African warehouse

#437

Post by lp0_on_fire »

tshaddox wrote: post #422
pessimizer wrote: post #325

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

It stretches credulity to suggest that the lack of non-smart TVs on the market causes the popularity of smart TVs. Would you also suggest that the lack of black and white TVs on the market causes the popularity of color TVs?

Color TVs superseded black and white because it was objectively an improvement for the customer. There wasn't any benefit to the manufacturer besides selling a new unit.

the "Smart" TVs of today are riddled with spyware and telemetry that provides a second revenue stream to the manufacture since 95% of the population is too lazy or uninformed or doesn't have the time to turn it off.

Yes, there benefits to the consumer in the form of convenience but it's not a paradigm shift like the switch from color to b & w. Also you could buy black and white televisions for _decades_ after the introduction of the color TV.

In the course of about 5 years "dumb" TVs have almost completely disappeared from he market. Maybe I'm just cynical but I have a hard time believing that it was because everyone just _had_ to have a TV with a buggy UI (in many cases) and/or loaded with spyware.

Re: Samsung remotely disables TVs looted from South African warehouse

#438

Post by exporectomy »

hiram112 wrote: post #377
lostlogin wrote: post #254

Earlier quoted context omitted.

New Zealand has a bit of legislation called the Consumer Guarantees Act, and it specifies something to the effect of ‘the thing should have a lifespan commensurate with the price, free of defects or faults’. It’s really great - the downside is that we pay more for things than people overseas do. I vastly prefer that we have it.

Would be interesting to know if big manufacturers then only sell their most dependable models in the NZ market, in order to avoid the costs that they can avoid in more business-friendly markets like the US. It would be a good way to decide which products to buy. Is this (equivalent) model sold in New Zealand? If so, it's probably known by the manufacturer to be solid. If not, avoid it at all costs.

A lot of consumers probably don't know or care so they might get away with the same products and just take the hit from the few returns. I'm in NZ and never knew about that reasonable lifetime bit. I just have a vague awareness that most appliances come with a card saying they have a 1 or 2 year warranty and beyond that, assume it's on me. There's usually some language like "in addition to your rights under the CGA" but who knows what those rights are. Also, below some price, it's just too much hassle to have figure out how returning it works and weighing the risk that I might get charged for the repair if it turns out to be due to mistreatment, not a defect.

Re: Samsung remotely disables TVs looted from South African warehouse

#439

Post by MereInterest »

zucker42 wrote: post #393
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.

Few people feel strongly that a chip running Linux makes a TV worse. What they object to is when the manufacturer controls the TV rather than the owner of the TV. Modern smart TVs override the users' desired by, for example, showing ads. It's even possible these chips will eventually be responsible for copyright verification. This would be fixed if it was possible to modify the chip's software and easy to install alt…

Exactly. Were smart TVs to come with OSMC pre-installed, where I have full root privileges on the computer, then it would be a fantastic thing. But since they are instead designed to spy on the alleged owner, to report usage, to download unskippable advertisements, then smart TVs have instead become an abomination.

Re: Samsung remotely disables TVs looted from South African warehouse

#440

Post by lp0_on_fire »

zucker42 wrote: post #393
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.

Few people feel strongly that a chip running Linux makes a TV worse. What they object to is when the manufacturer controls the TV rather than the owner of the TV. Modern smart TVs override the users' desired by, for example, showing ads. It's even possible these chips will eventually be responsible for copyright verification. This would be fixed if it was possible to modify the chip's software and easy to install alt…

"Please drink verification can"

https://i.imgur.com/dgGvgKF.png

Post reply on HN