I’m Terrified of My New TV • Hacker News Board

Re: I’m Terrified of My New TV

#261

Post by freehunter » Fri, Oct 31, 2014, 2:02 PM UTC

tmuir wrote: post #103

bruce511 wrote: post #19

I'm probably not normal, but frankly I would just leave it unplugged from the Internet. At the end of the day my current tv does what I need to do (ie act as a big monitor) without an internet connection. Given the number of devices already floating around here for browsing the web, I don't really need my tv to do that. For streaming I have Chromecast or whatever. I get that tv makers want to sell me something, but t…

I can't believe that people buy integrated media players with their TVs. They are usually multiple hundreds of dollars on top of the base TV model price, have terrible interfaces, and are crippleware, using apps with very few services. I suppose the economics aren't as straightforward, but I'm of the opinion that Chromecast, Roku, AppleTV, etc are the next layer of crippleware. A small form factor Windows box or a Ma…

>A wireless mouse always trumps a remote.

Absolutely not. I do not want a mouse being used at my couch. I do not want my movie interrupted with Windows Update. I do not want to fiddle with XBMC or some other hacked together, unintegrated system.

I subscribe to the Unix philosophy when it comes to my home entertainment. I have a stereo that only plays audio. I have a TV that only plays video. I have a set-top box that only streams content. I have a DVD player than only plays discs. The last thing I need is a computer sitting in my living room making demands of me that are not related to the function I need it for.

I can read ebooks on my phone or desktop, but a Kindle, as a dedicated device, is much better suited to that purpose. That's why I have a Roku. There will never be a mousepad on the arm of my couch.

Re: I’m Terrified of My New TV

#262

Post by opendais » Fri, Oct 31, 2014, 2:10 PM UTC

sysk wrote: post #245

olifante wrote: post #240

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So if the invisible hand of the market "chooses" to create an Orwellian total surveillance society, that will be OK, because hey, consumers chose it.

First, what comes closest to Orwellian total surveillance today is the NSA mass surveillance program which was created by government, not the free market. Second, I wouldn't personally feel OK with that outcome but I would also recognize that most people do (given your premise) and that I have no authority over their personal choices.

Government elections are pretty close to the free market in the real world for many things. The better funded candidate wins 85% of the time which virtually guarantees every political seat is bought [in the free market]:

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2011/oct/...

Simply because you don't personally have the wealth to purchase a congressional seat of your very own doesn't change the fact that when 85% of them are essentially decided by the money spent that they are basically "buying" the win at that point.

So to claim the free market doesn't create an Orwellian total surveillance society is pretty much false across the board.

1) In the "free market", you have Google, Amazon, and a number of other businesses that try to build that sort of capability to profile their customers for advertising and sales purposes.

2) In the "government where majority power is purchased through the application of money", we have the NSA which engages in both commercial and military espionage.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/sep/09/nsa-spying-braz... http://www.bbc.com/news/25907502

etc.

So when you say the NSA is divorced from the free market, I think you are delusional and/or ignorant. I find it scary that people don't seem to understand that the majority of power in government is essentially paid for and if your sponsors don't like you...the money dries up. So unless you are independently wealthy [on the scale of being a billionaire] and can just self-finance every single campaign, you aren't really an independent agent but instead doing your best to balance who "bought" your vote to minimize the damage.

Re: I’m Terrified of My New TV

#263

Post by gglitch » Fri, Oct 31, 2014, 2:11 PM UTC

aragot wrote: post #252

matthewmacleod wrote: post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't really agree – I'm very nervous about the idea of government banning technologies. If I want to provide a real-time audio feed from my home to Samsung, then that is my choice to make. If government is to do anything here, it's to make sure that there's a minimum standard of notification which is required for these devices. Maybe something like an explicit opt-in for any feature which transmits data to third p…

In Europe we don't really believe in "it is your choice you make" (on other topics) because there are so many factors which prevent you from making this choice freely. For example the choice of accepting Samsung's TOS could be bundled with the choice of flatsharing with someone. Or being a guest of someone. If you need to refuse attending a party because you've made the choice of disagreeing with Samsung's TOS, you'r…

Not sure why this was downvoted, I kind of agree. We're supposed to be defending rational choices made by informed consumers, but I too question whether current regulation adequately safeguards either one of those principles.

Re: I’m Terrified of My New TV

#264

Post by gglitch » Fri, Oct 31, 2014, 2:15 PM UTC

sysk wrote: post #236

jabjoe wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No. Government needs to have laws against this. We can't leave it up to ignorant and fickle consumers. This is a failure of the system of law, thus government. Consumer action is no substitute. Voting with wallets is not equal in anyway to voting. And never should be. We shouldn't be trying to herd consumers to punish companies, we should be asking governments to do their job.

> We can't leave it up to ignorant and fickle consumers. People like you infuriate me to no end. The fact is that a lot of consumers are willing to trade privacy for convenience, price, etc. Privacy just doesn't weigh much in those people's list of priorities. I'm glad we still have a semblance of free market capitalism because if people like you had their way, a lot of modern technologies simply wouldn't exist. That…

No offense, but this seems specious because it presumes that a majority of consumers are making a rational choice from a well-informed position, which is not necessarily the case. They're currently making the trade, yes, but that doesn't mean they fully understand the implications of their decisions.

* Edited for grammar

Re: I’m Terrified of My New TV

#265

Post by opendais » Fri, Oct 31, 2014, 2:15 PM UTC

downandout wrote: post #155

I wasn't particularly disturbed by this article until I got to the following passage regarding the "Voice Command" feature: "Please be aware that if your spoken words include personal or other sensitive information, that information will be among the data captured and transmitted to a third party." I don't think there is a prison horrible enough to send these people to. There is NO legitimate reason that an always-on…

> I cannot envision a circumstance in which this "feature" was not put in at the direct request of law enforcement.

I can. In an eCommerce app we were thinking of building, we wanted voice search and voice "buy" so that people only had to tap images of what they wanted. We weren't planning to give them an option either. It was scrapped because of a lack of budget and it seemed like the gimmick wouldn't be enough for anyone to care.

The technical limitations of the TV market makes sending the audio data to a 3rd party [e.g. Google's voice recognition servers] a necessity.

That said, I fully expect this feature is capable of remote activation for "tech support" purposes and that it can be enabled at the request of law enforcement. But honestly, if you are getting pissed off about the TV over law enforcement concerns...they can do the same damned thing with your cell phone. Are you keeping it inside a fridge or something? No?

Re: I’m Terrified of My New TV

#266

Post by authatheist » Fri, Oct 31, 2014, 2:18 PM UTC

loup-vaillant wrote: post #234

authatheist wrote: post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A tiny elite can't rule over millions if the millions are opposed to being ruled at all. Today, no one sees governments as the rulers they are, but everyone considers dictatorships illegitimate. But from our point of view, what's the practical difference between being forced to comply with a King's royal edicts and being forced to comply with a bunch of politicians'? Cartels can't be maintained in a free society. We…

Or, the rest of the cartel can launch a denigration campaign against the defector, or poach the defector's employees, or other shady means that money can buy, even in a "free society". And of course, I wouldn't rule out outright criminal behaviour. I recall being told about a board meeting where they discussed triggering an "accident" to get rid of polluting chemicals, because it was cheaper than abiding to the count…

How would the remaining cartel members cause harm to the defector by badmouthing him?

If the guy is selling X for half the cartel price, and can point to the cartel members and tell people how they've been screwed by them, what do people care aboit what the cartel scum is saying anymore? Nothing. They'll just buy X for 50% cheaper. You know you would too.

Who are trashing the planet? Ordinary people, or big corporations who've paid politicians off to let them pollute? What about militaries all over the world? Do you really think ordinary people are the problem here, or govts the solution? Really?

Re: I’m Terrified of My New TV

#267

Post by TheHypnotist » Fri, Oct 31, 2014, 2:18 PM UTC

anon4 wrote: post #211

lurchpop wrote: post #24

Went through this recently at Best Buy. The salesperson said by next year they may no longer carry any "dumb" tvs. Currently, those options are almost gone. I didn't see any dumb tvs over 40" and there were no 4Ks without "smart" features. I plan on just blocking it in my router, but who knows if the TV scans around for open hotspots. If I were a "smart" developer Id store everything locally if offline, then dump to…

Open it up and take a pair of scissors to the camera/mic cables?

I was wondering about this. Is there the potential it could cause the TV to throw an error?

Re: I’m Terrified of My New TV

#268

Post by authatheist » Fri, Oct 31, 2014, 2:20 PM UTC

loup-vaillant wrote: post #234

authatheist wrote: post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A tiny elite can't rule over millions if the millions are opposed to being ruled at all. Today, no one sees governments as the rulers they are, but everyone considers dictatorships illegitimate. But from our point of view, what's the practical difference between being forced to comply with a King's royal edicts and being forced to comply with a bunch of politicians'? Cartels can't be maintained in a free society. We…

Or, the rest of the cartel can launch a denigration campaign against the defector, or poach the defector's employees, or other shady means that money can buy, even in a "free society". And of course, I wouldn't rule out outright criminal behaviour. I recall being told about a board meeting where they discussed triggering an "accident" to get rid of polluting chemicals, because it was cheaper than abiding to the count…

Somehow you failed to address my point about rulers, by the way.

Re: I’m Terrified of My New TV

#269

Post by spacemanmatt » Fri, Oct 31, 2014, 2:20 PM UTC

imgabe wrote: post #214

enobrev wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google led me to Samsung. Under the "Voice Recognition" section [1] Voice Recognition You can control your SmartTV, and use many of its features, with voice commands. If you enable Voice Recognition, you can interact with your Smart TV using your voice. To provide you the Voice Recognition feature, some voice commands may be transmitted (along with information about your device, including device identifiers) to a thi…

Isn't that exactly how Google's voice recognition works? And Siri's too I assume? Your phone doesn't have the processing power to do speech-to-text on the fly, so it sends it to a server to do it. I don't see a vast government conspiracy behind this. If they can make the TV a bit cheaper by putting in a less powerful processor and taking advantage of the always present high speed Internet connection, of course they w…

Almost. The phone can do the TTS on the fly, but it can't calibrate itself without server-aggregated data. So it needs to send off SOME voice captures to central in order to work at peak performance.

Re: I’m Terrified of My New TV

#270

Post by authatheist » Fri, Oct 31, 2014, 2:24 PM UTC

loup-vaillant wrote: post #183

authatheist wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If a large enough percentage of people decide to disregard govts and forcefully defend themselves against their enforcers if necessary, then govts just cease to function and exist. I'm not saying we're there now, or even near a point where that's feasible, but it is one way out.

Good luck trying to convince people to merely get rid of their government. We need an alternative, and the mere lack of government is not it. It will be perceived as chaos, and few people actually want chaos. In other words, even if we don't want rulers we still need rules. We need a system. Actually, we will have a system, anyway. even "no system" is a system. It's just not clear how it would actually work at the mo…

We keep having to tell people that having no ruleRs doesn't mean having no ruleS. If by "no system" you mean "freedom", that's fine with me. Sure, we need rules and negative consequences for breaking them, but that does not require rulers.