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

LG says we're fake news [video]

youtube.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 209 posts

Re: LG says we're fake news [video]

#81

Post by pixelatedindex »

simmonmt wrote: post #59
dgellow wrote: post #9

This „we own the glass“ idea is completely insane. How does an industry degenerate to the point where they consider acceptable to base their business model on owning part of the product they sell you?

It's not entirely the fault of the industry. Consumer preferences are part of this equation too. https://www.streamtvinsider.com/advertising/roku-vizio-lean-... If consumers are unwilling to shell out for a TV priced high enough that the manufacturer doesn't need to do things like this to earn a (decent) profit, then what we've got is what you get. You could certainly argue that the industry should've held the line,…

This stance is so anti-consumer it's laughable. Are you seriously implying LG doesn't turn a decent profit with their massive empire? There's an issue with capitalism of chasing infinite growth rather than stability, and this is one of the consequences of chasing such growth.

Re: LG says we're fake news [video]

#83

Post by fzeroracer »

dgellow wrote: post #9

This „we own the glass“ idea is completely insane. How does an industry degenerate to the point where they consider acceptable to base their business model on owning part of the product they sell you?

I'm not sure how anyone didn't see this coming.

Literally every business is working towards a solution where consumers own nothing and they own everything. Games, music, movies. They want to sell you subscriptions to use shit like your car or your fridge. They want to double dip on that by making you not only pay for the ability to use the stuff you bought, but also so that they can sell everything you do on it to advertisers. This is even especially true with all the shit people feed LLMs daily for work or personal purposes.

This is the end state of an unregulated capitalist market without consumer protections.

Re: LG says we're fake news [video]

#84

Post by gustavus »

applfanboysbgon wrote: post #72
gustavus wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I brought this up all the time I argued with co-workers I advocated for Open Source because I knew where this was headed and every time it played out the exact way this comic did. Now I just post a link to this comic in discussion about these kind of things. https://xkcd.com/743/

Open source caused this, as much as anything else did. When you demand that software is free, you kill the market for paid software, leaving only enshittified software to fill the void. This has the dual effect of being worse for both developers and consumers: significantly fewer developers can make a living outside of working for $EvilEnterprise, which have an easier time centralizing and monopolizing the market, an…

Open Source never meant having to give your software away for free, it was always free as in speech. In that you could see the crap you got and change it if you wanted to.

But you're right I'm sure that if there hadn't been the GCC there wouldn've been a ton of competing compilers. I'm sure that it was the existence of Apache that ruined computing and brought about the enshittification of the web not MS trying to force everyone to cater to IE and then Google doing the same with Chrome, it's all just because of that evil Open Source.

Re: LG says we're fake news [video]

#85

Post by applfanboysbgon »

gustavus wrote: post #84
applfanboysbgon wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Open source caused this, as much as anything else did. When you demand that software is free, you kill the market for paid software, leaving only enshittified software to fill the void. This has the dual effect of being worse for both developers and consumers: significantly fewer developers can make a living outside of working for $EvilEnterprise, which have an easier time centralizing and monopolizing the market, an…

Open Source never meant having to give your software away for free, it was always free as in speech. In that you could see the crap you got and change it if you wanted to. But you're right I'm sure that if there hadn't been the GCC there wouldn've been a ton of competing compilers. I'm sure that it was the existence of Apache that ruined computing and brought about the enshittification of the web not MS trying to for…

> Open Source never meant having to give your software away for free, it was always free as in speech.

Sure, sure. And how exactly is software not also free-as-in-beer when any consumer can just download it themselves?

> if there hadn't been the GCC there wouldn've been a ton of competing compilers.

As I already noted in reply to your sibling comment, which you conveniently chose to ignore, every single one of those competing compilers bar one is funded by big tech. You can count the number of compiler developers who make a living without being funded by big tech, in the entire world, on your hands. GCC development is itself supported by big tech.

> Google doing the same with Chrome, it's all just because of that evil Open Source.

Do you need to be reminded that Chromium is open-source software? There is no market for competition to Chrome because no browser developer could compete with "free". Firefox is open-source and also propped up by billions in Google funding. There are zero consumer-viable browsers that are not just a Chromium or Firefox reskin.

You even brought up IE, which is an example of the exact principle I'm talking about. It wasn't open-source, but, same as open-source software, it was free, and this big tech-funded free software killed its paid competitor (Netscape). This was a huge deal at the time, enough for the US government to get involved in antitrust. Then MS got let off with a gentle warning, everybody shrugged their shoulders, developed amnesia, and decided actually it's great if we let 5 or so tech monopolies undercut all of their competitors with 'free' software and solidify complete control of the market.

Re: LG says we're fake news [video]

#86

Post by rcxdude »

gustavus wrote: post #84
applfanboysbgon wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Open source caused this, as much as anything else did. When you demand that software is free, you kill the market for paid software, leaving only enshittified software to fill the void. This has the dual effect of being worse for both developers and consumers: significantly fewer developers can make a living outside of working for $EvilEnterprise, which have an easier time centralizing and monopolizing the market, an…

Open Source never meant having to give your software away for free, it was always free as in speech. In that you could see the crap you got and change it if you wanted to. But you're right I'm sure that if there hadn't been the GCC there wouldn've been a ton of competing compilers. I'm sure that it was the existence of Apache that ruined computing and brought about the enshittification of the web not MS trying to for…

The freedoms that the GPL gives to users in effect means giving your software away for free (because any single one of them is allowed to republish it openly). I do think there is a possible alternative model which gives most of the user freedom Stallman cared about but which doesn't produce this (something along the lines of being able to view the source code of software you buy, as well as modify it, but only being allowed to share the modifications with others who have bought the software, or only being allowed to distribute the patches as opposed to republishing the full software), but this hasn't really been tried as far as I know.

Re: LG says we're fake news [video]

#87

Post by rcxdude »

applfanboysbgon wrote: post #72
gustavus wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I brought this up all the time I argued with co-workers I advocated for Open Source because I knew where this was headed and every time it played out the exact way this comic did. Now I just post a link to this comic in discussion about these kind of things. https://xkcd.com/743/

Open source caused this, as much as anything else did. When you demand that software is free, you kill the market for paid software, leaving only enshittified software to fill the void. This has the dual effect of being worse for both developers and consumers: significantly fewer developers can make a living outside of working for $EvilEnterprise, which have an easier time centralizing and monopolizing the market, an…

Eh, areas where there was and is still plenty of scope to just charge for a product have also been heavily enshittified, so I don't think you can lay much blame at open source for this.

Re: LG says we're fake news [video]

#88

Post by jeffbee »

reaperducer wrote: post #68
jeffbee wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It feels like there must be multiple completely different implementations of LG OLED TVs. I would not say that my LG has a "main screen" of any kind. When I turn mine on it shows the last input that had been used or, if that thing is off, it shows the bouncy egg and "No Signal". If I press the button on the remote that says RECENTS and has a picture of a house on it, which I guess is the "main screen", it maintains t…

Hulu, Prime, Peacock, YouTube, Netflix, Apple TV, and Disney+ happen to be today's recents. Where do you find the time to post on HN?

Those are just all of the apps I used in 9 years in the order that I last opened them.

Re: LG says we're fake news [video]

#89

Post by bob029 »

hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #27
add-sub-mul-div wrote: post #10

The crazy part of this is that LG did not fear flat out admitting they do fingerprint the audio of what you watch. I already knew that, but I can't imagine it's common knowledge yet. How long ago was it that that would have been the crazy untrue accusation?

Not defending LG's stance, but hasn't LG always said they do this as part of ACR (automatic content recognition) for the purposes of targeted advertising? LG says it's opt in, and I think the devil is really in the details about what the consent screen says, but the only way I think it would be a "crazy accusation" is if LG was doing this without consent.

They're not doing it with consent. LG still covertly takes screenshots of everything you display on your screen even when you set every available option that's supposed to stop this:

https://www.reddit.com/r/LGOLED/s/x8iBNCPya5

And there are cases of LG re-enabling these ACR options without your consent when they push firmware updates, and even randomly without updating, at which point the TV will send all the past and present ACR data it's harvested from you to LG, without your consent:

https://www.reddit.com/r/webos/s/Vn0jFhKsXO

https://www.reddit.com/r/LGOLED/s/wRFMmQHXHG

Post reply on HN