371–380 of 548 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
We should really be happy that Torvalds decided to license Linux as GPL software. If it was BSD these discussions would simply not exist, and corporate power over software would be even greater. I would dare to say we would probably not even have an open source scene at all...
Unfortunately, Torvalds supported tivoization: https://lkml.org/lkml/2007/6/13/289
For the tech-savvy, I'm not too worried about smart TVs. I just do this: > If you want premium image quality or sound, you’re better off using a smart TV offline. In the future, if they add e-sims, we'll just remove them or de-solder or whatever. The real risk is cars: if they start not working without cell network connections.
The cheat code is Sceptre dumb TVs from Wal-Mart's web site. I want Hackernews to know about this so that Sceptre and Wal-Mart can get sales and know that there's a substantial market for these devices, not shrug their shoulders and go "we may as well take these off the market and sell enshittified crap instead; it's not like our customers know or care about the difference."
I’d be in the market but walmart.ca doesn’t list any Sceptre TVs. (Nor does any other Canadian retailer.)
For a hacker news article, it misses the crucial option - hacking a smart TV! I have LG OLED jailbroken using rootmy.tv, it was pretty trivial. It's basically a linux computer with a huge screen, you can customize it, SSH into it, map any commands to the remote, etc. Before I only used monitor, simple DP/HDMI input is all I wanted. But being able to take full control of the tv and connect it with other devices in the…
You shouldn't have to hack it, you should have the right to repair the software on your device. Hopefully the Vizio lawsuit will help with that for Linux based devices, signs are looking good though. https://sfconservancy.org/copyleft-compliance/vizio.html
For the tech-savvy, I'm not too worried about smart TVs. I just do this: > If you want premium image quality or sound, you’re better off using a smart TV offline. In the future, if they add e-sims, we'll just remove them or de-solder or whatever. The real risk is cars: if they start not working without cell network connections.
If we continue giving money to people who build malware into the products, the malware will eventually be baked in deeply enough that the rest of the device will refuse to operate if it can't phone home to the ministry of truth or wherever.
For the tech-savvy, I'm not too worried about smart TVs. I just do this: > If you want premium image quality or sound, you’re better off using a smart TV offline. In the future, if they add e-sims, we'll just remove them or de-solder or whatever. The real risk is cars: if they start not working without cell network connections.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Obviously they suggest you to instead get an Apple TV I did the same last year though when I couldn’t find a good non-smart tv. Even if you don’t like the advice it is a practical solution for normies.
The Apple TV box does not have a microphone and a camera, but beyond that there is absolutely no reason to think it's any more private than a "smart" TV.
> Best ways to find a dumb TV I did not give my TV network access. Works fine.
Manufacturers know people do this. The TV will attempt to connect to any open network (neighbors) and I'd be shocked if they haven't at least considered packaging them with 4G/5G antennas. You're gonna need a Faraday Cage.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> It's basically a linux computer with a huge screen Why would I want a Linux computer with a huge screen? I just want a huge screen. I’ll provide my own connected devices, independent of the screen.
Why wouldn't you want it to be a computer? Then it can be connected to your devices AND also do the job itself in a situation where it's awkward to connect to a device. If already needs a computer in it to drive menus / modern display protocols. Having that computer be powerful enough to also decode content is barely an extra cost.
Because I can then easily upgrade my computer without upgrading my TV.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Unfortunately, Torvalds supported tivoization: https://lkml.org/lkml/2007/6/13/289
Because anti-tivoization doesn’t make sense in a software license. Imagine you make a smart toaster, and you make it entirely out of open source software. You release all the changes you made too, complying fully with the spirit of open source. People could take your software, buy some parts and make their own OSS toasters, everything’s great. But for safety reasons, since the software controls when the toaster pops,…
A software author has the right to set terms for use of their software, including requiring that manufacturers provide end users certain freedoms.