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

501–510 of 727 posts

Re: Samsung remotely disables TVs looted from South African warehouse

#501

Post by Johnny555 »

RulerOf wrote: post #499
Johnny555 wrote: post #475

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I never wanted one because I was afraid that one or the other would break, then it would be half-useless. My parents had one where the TV part stopped working, but the VCR still worked. It had video/audio out jacks so dad plugged it into their other TV, so they had a dead TV sitting next to their working TV for use as a VCR.

Smart TVs from at least the last 5 years have a similar problem. You update the software and they become excruciatingly slow, or you can't update the software and they gradually become useless. Damned if you do, damned if you don't. But I can replace an old Roku for $39.

True, my old LG TV UI kept getting slower and slower with each update, finally I stopped applying updates and switched to a Roku.

Though the good thing is that I can't see the carcass of the old SmartTV laying around, the TV stays connected to the Roku so unless I accidentally hit the Channel up/down button and switch it to TV mode, I never see the LG SmartTV features.

Re: Samsung remotely disables TVs looted from South African warehouse

#502

Post by kelnos »

rovr138 wrote: post #449
gsich wrote: post #434

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>L;DR- TVs are using their own cellular connections The link doesn't say that.

It links to https://venturebeat.com/2019/05/01/huawei-reportedly-plans-f... And it opens with, > Though its 5G products are not entirely welcome in the United States, Huawei is reportedly pushing forward with a unique new product: the world’s first 5G television. As Nikkei reports this morning, the Chinese company plans to use the cellular-enabled TV and new PCs to challenge Samsung’s and Apple’s dominant positions i…

That's not really what's being talked about, though. The fear is that if you don't connect your TV to your wifi network, it will have a secret, hidden LTE radio that it uses anyway.

It doesn't seem that Huawei is being at all secretive about this; they are advertising it as a feature.

Re: Samsung remotely disables TVs looted from South African warehouse

#503

Post by kelnos »

k4rli wrote: post #379
RKearney wrote: post #359

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Why is everyone so confused that smart TVs are popular? Because almost all of them use internet connectivity to show you ads on home screens.

With LG C9 I haven't seen a single ad in a year since I've had it. There are large amounts of tracking being blocked by pi.hole however. One LG domain has been blocked 22.5k times in past 8.5 months.

The thing that would bother me about this is that you only know what's being blocked; you have no idea if other spyware is getting through because your pihole just doesn't happen to know about another domain in use.

The only surefire way to block it would be to put some metal or foil around the wifi antenna (or disconnect it entirely, if possible). Otherwise the TV could connect to any random open wifi network it might find (assuming there is one in range). Even if you connect it to your own network and block all its traffic, it might just decide your network is broken and find another one.

Re: Samsung remotely disables TVs looted from South African warehouse

#504

Post by jen20 »

actually_a_dog wrote: post #392
powerslacker wrote: post #388

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wait a minute now. TV manufacturers are mining the frames from video played on them in order to detect which shows people are watching. They then sell that data to 3rd parties (typically advertisers and data brokers). It's maybe not some "grand conspiracy", but there is a definite profit motive to push smart TVs and only smart TVs. It is far more profitable than a one time sale since you can sell data over and over.…

Luckily, you can block them: https://lazyadmin.nl/home-network/how-to-block-ads-on-your-s...

One should not have to, nor should they have to explain to the less technically literate ow to. The practice is disgusting and needs to be handled by regulation with teeth.

Re: Samsung remotely disables TVs looted from South African warehouse

#505

Post by kelnos »

mattnewton wrote: post #338
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.

There are almost no tv manufacturers offering consumer TVs without the ability to connect to the internet to collect metrics, display ads, and run “apps” like Netflix. I don’t doubt it’s because the upsell is profitable and regular consumers would choose the TV with smart features over a similarly priced TV without, but it’s also possible no one has decided to compete on the “our TV is $40 cheaper, comes with a rebat…

I would expect the smart TV is "cheaper" for the manufacturer to make; likely they get money from Netflix (etc.) for including their apps by default on the TV, and I'm sure they get recurring revenue from selling the data they get from the spyware on the TV. I'm sure that extra money more than makes up for the cost of the extra hardware in there to make it all work.

Re: Samsung remotely disables TVs looted from South African warehouse

#506

Post by hoov »

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.

There is also spyware running on them. They literally spy on what you're watching and send the info home, and the data gets sold to market to you. No thanks.

Edit.

They also connect to unprotected wifi networks to send data without your permission.

Re: Samsung remotely disables TVs looted from South African warehouse

#507

Post by acchow »

wait_a_minute wrote: post #36

I bought one of Samsung's smart televisions a couple years ago. I think I paid $1500 for it. Anyway, it started showing me ads and the TV eventually became sluggish less than a month after owning it. Returned it as defective. Ever since that experience, I swore of all smart televisions and will never buy another Samsung television or smartphone again if I can help it.

Get an LG. Problem solved.

Re: Samsung remotely disables TVs looted from South African warehouse

#508

Post by kelnos »

echlebek wrote: post #337
dawnerd wrote: post #328

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can but they're really expensive and not designed for regular home users.

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

Does it come with a remote control? I expect most panels sold as "monitors" don't.

Re: Samsung remotely disables TVs looted from South African warehouse

#509

Post by jen20 »

nmstoker wrote: post #468
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

Maybe your comment was tongue in cheek but if the product did not reveal it contained a radio transmitter, this would undoubtedly be illegal in the US, EU & UK.

And what will you do when there are no TVs to buy that do not contain LTE transmitters to force more spying upon you?

Re: Samsung remotely disables TVs looted from South African warehouse

#510

Post by 1vuio0pswjnm7 »

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 confused that smart TVs are popular?"

TBH, Im more confused by the parent comment. (Although this is a very typical type of HN comment, passive-aggressive denigration of anything "not popular".) These type of comments make me wonder why would anyone, other than the companies benefitting, care if some HN commenters do not love so-called smart TVs. This is not a mainstream audience. Moreover, I see no comments indicating "confusion" why surveillance TVs are popular. I see comments that indicate either (a) distaste for them, (b) desire for alternatives or (c) passive-aggressive denigration, like the parent; for example, something like "the market has spoken". WTF. Why would anyone read HN if all they want to read is a restatement of "popular" culture.

Only speaking for myself but I want to read about alternatives to popular choices that feed surveillance marketing as "business strategy".

Post reply on HN