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

Smart-TV blocklist for Pi-Hole

perflyst.github.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 246 posts

Re: Smart-TV blocklist for Pi-Hole

#111

Post by adamparsons »

rahimnathwani wrote: post #105
encryptluks2 wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is why you should always avoid your ISP modem/router combos.

Some providers offer better pricing if you use their modem/router combo. For example, Xfinity plans come with a 1.2TB monthly data cap. So, you might have the following options: A) $50/month with your own equipment and a data cap B) $80/month for the same as (A), but unlimited data C) $60/month for the same as (B), but higher bandwidth and using the ISP's equipment

Something sounds horribly wrong here. It should be cheaper when using your own router (aside from the once off cost to buy the router)

What horrible things are they doing with that router that they would effectively pay you $20/month to use it for

Re: Smart-TV blocklist for Pi-Hole

#114

Post by nobody9999 »

the_snooze wrote: post #89
nobody9999 wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>I agree despite using DNS blocking myself. DNS blocking can easily be mitigated against with DoH or DoT at the application level. It's only a matter of time before advertisers start using either to bypass DNS blocking and serve ads. DoH/DoT are just the camel's nose under the tent. Just wait (perhaps it's already happening) until TV manufacturers install 4g/5g modems in their devices. At which point, there will be a…

>Just wait (perhaps it's already happening) until TV manufacturers install 4g/5g modems in their devices. I hear this raised every now and then, but is that even feasible economically? Those embedded cell connections are a recurring cost, after all. I'm curious if the per-unit revenue from ads and tracking is large enough to justify the per-unit cost to send/receive that data over a cell connection. Seems like UI nud…

>I hear this raised every now and then, but is that even feasible economically? Those embedded cell connections are a recurring cost, after all.

That's a great question. If it's not today, it likely will be soon.

I think it may be so already. These are niche cases, but the costs aren't so different than TVs:

I use a CPAP machine and the one I got six years ago had a cellular modem (as well as WiFi) without my involvement in any mobile account. Thankfully, I was able to disable that (and a big "Fuck you!" to Philips for being such rapacious scumbags).

I also got a Kindle as a gift in ~2004 or so and it had both WiFi and a cellular modem with no charges to me.

>Seems like UI nudges and dark patterns to push users into connecting their TVs to their home internet connection would be cheaper and more effective.

Cheaper? Definitely.

Effective? Most likely yes.

More effective than a cellular modem? Methinks not so much. A device connecting to a network over which you have no control would be much more effective, IMHO.

Aside from a small group of folks who will shoot, stab, defenestrate, bend, fold, spindle or mutilate such a device, most folks would likely just shrug and move on while being forced to watch ads.

And more's the pity.

Re: Smart-TV blocklist for Pi-Hole

#115

Post by jjulius »

vlunkr wrote: post #90
jjulius wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes; PiHoles are used for far more than just blocking smart TVs. The difference between browsing the web at my house and browsing away from home is so stark that it's almost not worth browsing most sites if I'm not behind it.

I run a simple VPN at my house alongside pinhole. You can block ads anywhere that way.

I've been strongly considering it precisely because of this, just need to get around to setting it up.

Re: Smart-TV blocklist for Pi-Hole

#116

Post by chillfox »

walterbell wrote: post #84
eli wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a stretch given the context. A smart TV maker can put whatever they want in their own client software. They don't care what features Firefox and Google support.

Smart TV retail prices are subsidized by revenue from data analytics on content search and viewing. Web browsers are subsidized (free) by search (ad) revenue.

I would rather pay more for a TV than have it subsidized by ads. Or even better, a TV with no smart features, then I can just connect a computer for whatever smarts I want.

Re: Smart-TV blocklist for Pi-Hole

#117

Post by AnonC »

the_snooze wrote: post #89
nobody9999 wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>I agree despite using DNS blocking myself. DNS blocking can easily be mitigated against with DoH or DoT at the application level. It's only a matter of time before advertisers start using either to bypass DNS blocking and serve ads. DoH/DoT are just the camel's nose under the tent. Just wait (perhaps it's already happening) until TV manufacturers install 4g/5g modems in their devices. At which point, there will be a…

>Just wait (perhaps it's already happening) until TV manufacturers install 4g/5g modems in their devices. I hear this raised every now and then, but is that even feasible economically? Those embedded cell connections are a recurring cost, after all. I'm curious if the per-unit revenue from ads and tracking is large enough to justify the per-unit cost to send/receive that data over a cell connection. Seems like UI nud…

It’s not just a recurring cost with 4G/5G modems, but it’s also practically infeasible in many countries where getting a cellular connection of any kind requires KYC and related formalities. There’s no way these TV manufacturing companies can buy one connection per TV (and accept the liabilities that come with such a connection) or get their customers to have one. If they do try WiFi to a known hotspot that the company has deployed almost everywhere, that will be a huge cost with very little benefit.

If they make the TV into one of those monstrous Alexa Show (?) devices where you can make calls or do other things, they may be able to persuade some customers to get a connection for the TV. Even then it’s a stretch because most TVs are in one place for years and the places they’re in would have WiFi/broadband coverage in the same or a nearby room.

Re: Smart-TV blocklist for Pi-Hole

#118

Post by rahimnathwani »

adamparsons wrote: post #111
rahimnathwani wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some providers offer better pricing if you use their modem/router combo. For example, Xfinity plans come with a 1.2TB monthly data cap. So, you might have the following options: A) $50/month with your own equipment and a data cap B) $80/month for the same as (A), but unlimited data C) $60/month for the same as (B), but higher bandwidth and using the ISP's equipment

Something sounds horribly wrong here. It should be cheaper when using your own router (aside from the once off cost to buy the router) What horrible things are they doing with that router that they would effectively pay you $20/month to use it for

The only things I can think of:

- they get some data on how many (and what) LAN devices you have

- they face fewer support calls from people using DOCSIS modems with one of the buggy intel chipsets, and from people with a random router/modem combination that their support people aren't trained to debug

- they can expand their wifi hotspot network (the xfinity wifi hotspot is enabled by default, but the user can turn it off)

Re: Smart-TV blocklist for Pi-Hole

#119

Post by DistractionRect »

eli wrote: post #87
walterbell wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the most ill thought out "privacy" feature Whose privacy? DoH helps to protect billions in revenue for the ad network that funds Chrome, Firefox, Safari and web standards. A better web will need a different revenue model. In the meantime, here's a maintained guide to blocking DoH with pfsense, https://github.com/jpgpi250/piholemanual/blob/master/doc/Blo...

Many of the biggest ISPs in the US are actively monitoring DNS queries, collecting the data of which sites you visit, and packaging it for sale to ad networks and data brokers. DoH stops that.

It really doesn't, as server name indication is sent in clear text. As encrypted SNI didnt take off, you dont actually get privacy benefits from DoH and friends, just security/mild inconvenience to censors.

Re: Smart-TV blocklist for Pi-Hole

#120

Post by throwawayboise »

paulcole wrote: post #112
throwawayboise wrote: post #56

I'll be that guy: I sidestep the problem by not having a TV.

I sidedstepped the problem by buying a nice TV and not caring about ads or what the thing is doing w/ my wifi. Of all the things for me to get worked up over, this isn’t one of them.

I think that's fair, and honestly it's how 90% of the TV consumer market feels. The vast majority of people don't really care that their TV is collecting marketing info on them. I do, but I'm not going to bend over backwards to avoid it. I just won't buy one.
Post reply on HN