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

It’s Still Stupidly, Difficult to Buy a ‘Dumb’ TV

techdirt.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

321–330 of 434 posts

Re: It’s Still Stupidly, Difficult to Buy a ‘Dumb’ TV

#321

Post by vortico »

OrderlyTiamat wrote: post #211
vortico wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wouldn't the free market simply provide modifications with the cell networking removed for an extra $50 or so? The "discount" you get from buying a smart TV verses a dumb TV (which is a niche product so it would cost hundreds more) would still be positive after subtracting the cost of modification.

> Wouldn't the free market simply provide modifications The free market doesn't seem so keen on modifications, see phones, laptops etc. All walled gardens where even repair is discouraged.

How so? I can buy a modified Thinkpad (https://minifree.org/product/libre-t440p/ or http://www.cnmod.cn/x210/) because enough people demand it. If enough people demand dumb TVs but their niche prices far exceed smart TVs, then people will begin selling modified smart TVs without cell chips for mutually fair prices.

Re: It’s Still Stupidly, Difficult to Buy a ‘Dumb’ TV

#322

Post by next_xibalba »

readbeard wrote: post #311
next_xibalba wrote: post #299

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Billions of people like using the product and it hasn't hurt their lives. In fact, it has improved them . I don't believe Facebook or TV are equivalent to cocaine. I don't think your argument is made in good faith.

> I don't believe Facebook or TV are equivalent to cocaine. Exactly. You were making a broad claim that it is "paternalistic and elitist" to decide what is "good for you" vs "bad for you". If it is paternalistic and elitist in some cases, but appropriate in others, then don't we need a way to figure out what side of that line various things fall on?

> In what way do your arguments not also apply to cocaine?

This is the comment to which I was responding. As I see it, there are two premises here which both have to be accepted (i.e. it is an "AND" not an "OR"):

1) Facebook/TV is analogous to cocaine

2) Cocaine is bad for you

If I reject that Facebook/TV is analogous to cocaine, I reject the entire thing. I was not making a broad claim about people's autonomy vs. paternalism. I was making a narrow claim in relation to two (at worst) benign things: smart TVs and Facebook.

Re: It’s Still Stupidly, Difficult to Buy a ‘Dumb’ TV

#323

Post by mschuster91 »

ezfe wrote: post #281
mschuster91 wrote: post #212

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Blocking the MAC address from making connections outright seems like a more sensible way to prevent surveillance. That won't protect against DNS data exfiltration. Extremely low-bandwidth, but works in a lot of cases - people have even written proxy servers to get slow but working Internet on public hotspots that normally require login.

How does that work if you block the internet at the router level?

Simple: most router firewalls only block traffic that has source: and destination:, but traffic from source: to destination: will be allowed.

That is enough for the device to emit a DNS query like "pbs.12345.metricservice.example.com" to notfiy some tracking service that the device with serial 12345 just switched to a channel labeled "PBS". The router will resolve that name record at the DNS server for metricservice.example.com, which gets the request and logs it away.

Re: It’s Still Stupidly, Difficult to Buy a ‘Dumb’ TV

#324

Post by falcolas »

mst wrote: post #302
falcolas wrote: post #243

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What makes you think the price was discounted just because they found another way to monetize their users?

Last time I saw a TV vendor's margin breakout they were selling the hardware at basically cost. So in that particular case it appears to be what happened. (this was a year plus back so I've completely forgotten which vendor, sorry)

Worth looking at this:

https://www.engadget.com/vizio-q1-earnings-inscape-013937337...

Note that Visio is still making profit on the TVs itself, in addition to the ad revenue. Pretty standard operating procedure in most markets these days. Charge for the product, sell either additional features for the product (which used to come included in the price) or the metrics the product provides.

Re: It’s Still Stupidly, Difficult to Buy a ‘Dumb’ TV

#325

Post by sgjohnson »

dancemethis wrote: post #304
sgjohnson wrote: post #154

I for one enjoy that my Smart TV is subsidized by all the morons who think that my data is worth anything. It's not connected to internet. It's connected to Apple TV box. Thanks for the discount.

And then Apple getting a "monopoly" on your personal data and metadata is better, somehow...? Nevermind that this data is then shared between them. And anyone and anything else getting in through the doors in the back.

Feel free to replace “Apple TV” with whatver is your preferred input source, be it a Raspberry Pi or whatever.

It doesn’t change the fact that the people doing the subsidizing aren’t getting the intended value from me.

Re: It’s Still Stupidly, Difficult to Buy a ‘Dumb’ TV

#326

Post by snvzz »

chii wrote: post #10
ajsnigrutin wrote: post #6

Every TV is "stupid" when it's not connected to the internet, and none of them can transmit your data when disconnected.

If it turns out that too many people are disconnecting their tv, the manufacturer would merely add in a sim card. They don't yet ATM because they don't need to - too many people are stupidly connecting their wifi.

>If it turns out that too many people are disconnecting their tv, the manufacturer would merely add in a sim card.

Or silently use your neighbor's tv (of the same brand or cross-brand network pact) as access point. Not for streaming video, but just for the tracking.

This is where we're headed.

Re: It’s Still Stupidly, Difficult to Buy a ‘Dumb’ TV

#327

Post by navjack27 »

gruez wrote: post #220
everyone wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Afaik the difference between whats called a "monitor" and whats called a "TV" nowadays is that.. TV's show a compressed or upscaled image. TV's have much higher latency. And thats why something called a monitor is so much more expensive for the same size display.

>TV's show a compressed or upscaled image TVs can show a "compressed or upscaled image", but that doesn't mean it can't show uncompressed full resolution images (ie. HDMI input). In that regard they aren't that different from monitors. >TV's have much higher latency. >And thats why something called a monitor is so much more expensive for the same size display. This is more due to their firmware containing image proce…

Pretty much this. My TCL 4K HDR TV I bought two years ago for like 400 bucks has Roku in it and... I just ignore it. I use game mode on it and it's hooked up to my M1 Mac Mini all day long. I use Parsec when I'm lazy and use my desktop PC that way on it. Sometimes I'll Parsec the other way around from my PC to the Mac while it's displaying on the TV and there is absolutely zero latency that is perceivable when watching a video and the sound on in both places.

No ads ever bother me. No camera to scan me. It doesn't do anything. Even when I disabled my AD blocker on my router it didn't go ape.

Re: It’s Still Stupidly, Difficult to Buy a ‘Dumb’ TV

#329

Post by chrisjc »

jauco wrote: post #318
HonestOp001 wrote: post #307

Quick story. I purchased a Sony tv with android OS. In the store, the OS did everything I wanted. When set the system up at home, it worked just like in the store. Then five days later, an OS update forced ads onto the front page. The entire home page was changed from what I had purchased. Fortunately, I could reset the device back to the previous OS version and not let it anywhere near a wi fi. What I purchased and…

Friendly tip: new hdmi cables include ethernet. Make sure to use old ones to connect your media player

Of course both the TV and media player need to be ethernet-over-HDMI enabled as well. And if you want to be able to take advantage of all the latest visual and audio advancements, you'll probably need to use one of the latest cables that comes with ethernet-over-HDMI.

Is it possible to get one of the latest HDMI cables without ethernet? Are there ways to cut ethernet-over-HDMI off at the media device?

I know that there might be things that can be done through the network or at the router (PiHole,etc), but I'm wondering specifically about this gaping hole through HDMI.

(as I type this, I now remember that my router/Orbi can physically block individual devices)

Of course the next big issue will be when the TVs come with their own internet connection. I recall this is already happening with some HiSense TVs that come with 5g. I guess at this point we'll be forced to open these things up and disconnect the antenna.

Re: It’s Still Stupidly, Difficult to Buy a ‘Dumb’ TV

#330

Post by irobeth »

AndyMcConachie wrote: post #273
ortusdux wrote: post #259

I'm on year 3 of not accepting the EULA on my 'smart' tv. It has never been connected to the internet. It is effectively a dumb tv that was slightly cheaper because it has dormant bloatware.

Same. I don't understand why more people simply don't connect the thing to the network.

how far are we from "the TV has a cellular modem so it can receive advertising updates without the need for a home network", though?

isn't it like this for cars already?

Post reply on HN