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

Ask Wirecutter: Can you recommend a not-smart TV for me?

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

671–680 of 1001 posts

Re: Ask Wirecutter: Can you recommend a not-smart TV for me?

#671

Post by numpad0 »

nfRfqX5n wrote: post #393
rolenthedeep wrote: post #376

"just don't connect it to the internet" is such a typical HN response that completely misses the point. A smart TV with no internet connection is still a smart TV. It still has an entire operating system that needs to load wifi, ethernet, Bluetooth, usb driver stacks. It still has an awful, flashy interface that adds unnecessary steps between changing inputs. It still tries to load god knows what apps every time you…

What TV takes minutes to turn on?

None of them, because the Linux computer on TV boots up and goes to sleep immediately upon being plugged in, and is connected to an internal video mixer chip rather than managing the panel directly.

Re: Ask Wirecutter: Can you recommend a not-smart TV for me?

#672

Post by fnordpiglet »

imglorp wrote: post #443
delecti wrote: post #405

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A smart-but-disconnected TV can meet all of those functional requirements, and your nonfunctional requirements (low processing power) frankly don't matter to most people. My smart-but-disconnected TV turns on just as quickly as my PC monitors can return from sleep (a second or two); changing inputs is just as quick (input button on remote, left/right to select, okay to confirm), and the automatic input selection when…

Ads are really the least of our worries. Data about attention (viewing habits) is so immensely valuable, who knows what the next generation will do to obtain it? Years ago, the TV execs told us not to have a private conversation in the TV room. We all know how very easy it would -- if they wanted -- to exfiltrate your data in a variety of ways: Kismet, group Xfinity/Fios wifi passwords, or even ultrasonic beacons bet…

You mean like using a pervasive low bandwidth cellular data service or Sidewalk or other such tech? I’m surprised blackholing your TV even works any more given how cheap low bandwidth data services are to both add into the set and provision at scale, compared to the value of collecting all the smart tab data that’s not connected. Don’t forget a lot of TV users aren’t savvy enough to configure them, on the other end of the spectrum.

Re: Ask Wirecutter: Can you recommend a not-smart TV for me?

#673

Post by Godel_unicode »

1101010010 wrote: post #577
Larrikin wrote: post #567

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Networks with no password and no captive sign in portal are extremely rare nowadays. They are on by default and anyone with the IT ability to go in and change it will already know the dangers of letting anyone use the Internet you are paying for. But also are there any actual confirmed cases of TVs doing this? The comment section here always fear mongers about it (kudos for not mentioning Amazon sidewalk), but it isn…

> Networks with no password and no captive sign in portal are extremely rare nowadays. In my suburban-American experience, they are in fact they are more common these days as more consumers purchase and own ISP-provided equipment. > But also are there any actual confirmed cases of TVs doing this? Given the nature of proprietary closed source software, I am willing to accept a less than charitable assumption of what t…

Which ISPs are giving out APs with no key needed and no captive portal? Every one that I’m aware of requires some manner of secret to login to the shared AP.

Re: Ask Wirecutter: Can you recommend a not-smart TV for me?

#675

Post by kjs3 »

1101010010 wrote: post #532
delecti wrote: post #405

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A smart-but-disconnected TV can meet all of those functional requirements, and your nonfunctional requirements (low processing power) frankly don't matter to most people. My smart-but-disconnected TV turns on just as quickly as my PC monitors can return from sleep (a second or two); changing inputs is just as quick (input button on remote, left/right to select, okay to confirm), and the automatic input selection when…

It's only disconnected until your neighbor's AP decides to advertise an open guest network for it to automatically connect to.

Or they embed a 4G/5G radio.

Re: Ask Wirecutter: Can you recommend a not-smart TV for me?

#676

Post by Larrikin »

chillfox wrote: post #633
Larrikin wrote: post #567

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Networks with no password and no captive sign in portal are extremely rare nowadays. They are on by default and anyone with the IT ability to go in and change it will already know the dangers of letting anyone use the Internet you are paying for. But also are there any actual confirmed cases of TVs doing this? The comment section here always fear mongers about it (kudos for not mentioning Amazon sidewalk), but it isn…

Not really, The default wifi router supplied by the biggest ISP here has got a guest network turned on by default.

Which ISP? Comcast in America does that crap, but it's worthless to snoopers since you need a Comcast account to do anything on it, so will actively need to log in.

Re: Ask Wirecutter: Can you recommend a not-smart TV for me?

#677

Post by Godel_unicode »

chillfox wrote: post #633
Larrikin wrote: post #567

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Networks with no password and no captive sign in portal are extremely rare nowadays. They are on by default and anyone with the IT ability to go in and change it will already know the dangers of letting anyone use the Internet you are paying for. But also are there any actual confirmed cases of TVs doing this? The comment section here always fear mongers about it (kudos for not mentioning Amazon sidewalk), but it isn…

Not really, The default wifi router supplied by the biggest ISP here has got a guest network turned on by default.

Can you connect to it and get internet without hitting a captive portal that requires your ISP creds? That’s usually how it happens in the US.

Re: Ask Wirecutter: Can you recommend a not-smart TV for me?

#678

Post by kjs3 »

crazygringo wrote: post #516
TacticalCoder wrote: post #490

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> A smart TV with no internet connection And it's soon going to be impossible to dodge it going on the Internet anyway. Manufacturers are hard at work making sure that if any of any neighbor's Internet of Shitty Insecure Things [TM] device participate in the scam, the smart TV shall use your neighbor's device to escape and access the net. I forgot the name of the protocol / "feature", but it's a very real thing. So u…

That is total unfounded speculation unless you have evidence for it. Do you? There's been an urban legend going around for years that smart TV's automatically connect to unsecured wifi but nobody's ever been able to demonstrate it a single time. (Probably their kid had connected it intentionally or something.) So you might be conflating that urban legend with Amazon's network of Ring devices. But that's extremely low…

[flagged]

Re: Ask Wirecutter: Can you recommend a not-smart TV for me?

#680

Post by anonymouskimmer »

admax88qqq wrote: post #668
justinclift wrote: post #610

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I don't know if transparent Faraday cages are possible Depending on your budget, you could faraday enclose the whole room / building rather than trying to do an individual device. As related reading from back in the day: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tempest_(codename)

Of course then you can't use your phone inside your house/living room.

They still sell landlines.
Post reply on HN