Live data from Hacker News

The downfall of smart TVs: From promises of seamless viewing to ad tool

adguard.com

271–280 of 579 posts

Re: The downfall of smart TVs: From promises of seamless viewing to ad tool

#271
post #50
post #3

Probably correct URL: https://adguard.com/en/blog/smart-tv-ad-blocking.html

Oh, look: > If you're in for a more advanced and comprehensive solution, you may want to set up your own AGuard Home server It's an ad!

Did not read; I just looked for the likely URL.

Re: The downfall of smart TVs: From promises of seamless viewing to ad tool

#272
post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

However those TVs are not easy to get and, like you said, they come with an increased price. I couldn't recommend enough to buy an Apple TV (or equivalent) and block all Internet access to your "smart" TV. I did this and everything was instantly better.

How do you block internet if it will join open networks automatically?

It won't. Stories about it happening on the internet is plentiful, but actual evidence is scarce.

Re: The downfall of smart TVs: From promises of seamless viewing to ad tool

#273
post #57

> Some may argue that there's no need to be dramatic and that there's nothing wrong in seeing an occasional ad every now and then. Oh, no, I am very dramatic about this. I will go to any lengths not to see advertising. I will entirely forgo any platform that shows me even one ad, especially when I pay them. Amazon Prime video is already pushing it with their preroll previews. The second it's something else I'm cancel…

Ditto. I got rid of windows shortly after they introduced ads in the OS. It really doesn't matter to me that there are technical ways of blocking them, I don't want to have to think about it or play cat and mouse with them. When it comes to websites I really wouldn't care if they blocked my access because I use an ad blocker. I don't feel any entitlement to their content and they have no entitlement to what displays…

You could just use last good version.

Re: The downfall of smart TVs: From promises of seamless viewing to ad tool

#274

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So what legislation? How many consumers even knowing that they are being tracked and advertised to are willing to pay the price so their hardware, software, and services come ad free? If the US follows what the GDPR did, we will just have pop ups before every TV show asking us will we allow tracking.

If there is actually legal force behind our ability to say no, then this is not a bad place to be. Ideally we'd include in the law the provision to say no once for some extended period of time. CAN-SPAM is a precedent for this, I believe.

How did that work out?

Re: The downfall of smart TVs: From promises of seamless viewing to ad tool

#275
Last year I gave our smart TV to a friend as a gift and bought a “dumb” TV for $190 from Walmart. It has two inputs: one for an old fashioned antenna lead, and the other is HDMI.

I plugged an Apple iTV black box into it, and except for a slightly funky remote, it is a fantastic viewing, navigating, and discovery experience. I did give up image quality but I am much happier.

Re: The downfall of smart TVs: From promises of seamless viewing to ad tool

#276

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The hard, spikey, jagged, foul tasting pill to swallow then: Society needs to pay directly for content.

Amazon Prime Video requires a paid Amazon Prime subscription. You are paying for the content. You also paid for the TV you watch it on, and you pay for the delivery service to your house. There's money every step of the way, so, having advertising on top of that? Insane.

Depending on the service you may be paying a subsidized price.

Around 1994 my parents were paying $110~ USD for a cable package in suburban NY. It was basic cable, the extra premium channels, and HBO. Adjusted for inflation that's $210, I know that inflation doesn't always tell the entire economic story but now I'm paying

Netflix $20, HBO $15, Disney+ $6.76, Hulu is free with my cell phone plan but let's say $10. That's $52, my internet is $65 however I would have that anyway for many other reasons. Even if you added that in it's still much less expensive that in the past. The quality is also significantly better, and I can choose to watch most shows when I want.

Re: The downfall of smart TVs: From promises of seamless viewing to ad tool

#277
post #109
post #87

FWIW, it is still possible to get TVs without this stuff, albeit at a premium. TVs are still made for business usage in areas like conference rooms, wall displays etc. They're often found under labeling like "commercial digital signage" or "business display" or the like, they seem to often try to avoid using "TV" (if being cynical maybe to make them harder for normal people to discover and confuse them if they do). B…

However those TVs are not easy to get and, like you said, they come with an increased price. I couldn't recommend enough to buy an Apple TV (or equivalent) and block all Internet access to your "smart" TV. I did this and everything was instantly better.

"Smart" TV can connect to public Wifis and other devices from the same manufacturer around you. I don't know if they do that already, but they could.

Re: The downfall of smart TVs: From promises of seamless viewing to ad tool

#278
post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

this is a bit silly

Maybe, maybe not. The mental effects of products optimized for delivering advertising don't seem to be great for people or society (see: Meta's products, Twitter, TikTok).

Do you have evidence as to the negative mental effects and how bad they are?

Re: The downfall of smart TVs: From promises of seamless viewing to ad tool

#279
post #57

> Some may argue that there's no need to be dramatic and that there's nothing wrong in seeing an occasional ad every now and then. Oh, no, I am very dramatic about this. I will go to any lengths not to see advertising. I will entirely forgo any platform that shows me even one ad, especially when I pay them. Amazon Prime video is already pushing it with their preroll previews. The second it's something else I'm cancel…

Desire is the cause of suffering. Advertising, in its way, generates desire where there was once none and therefore causes suffering. And, it does so on industrial mass-scale!

Worst of all, there is no mechanism, at all, to restore the bliss advertising has destroyed. Because, money cannot buy confidence, friendship, fulfillment, or (most famously) happiness. So, once exposed, you have no way to regain what has been obliterated from your soul.

Advertising is not harmless, adblocking is not immoral, and your well-being is more important than anyone’s profits.

Re: The downfall of smart TVs: From promises of seamless viewing to ad tool

#280

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Much of society either is paying or is willing to pay. Note that even in places that we _do_ pay, for example cable TV, we still get ads.

Right but that means you're not paying full price, since the ads subsidise it. So to modify the OP's point, people are going to need to be prepared to pay more for content and IMO we're already at price saturation point now.

Not necessarily - it's what the market will bear, not the cost itself. This just means the target market will tolerate the ads, not that they are subsidizing the cost of the TV. The extra revenue could just as easily be gravy - especially because this is probably the result of some implicit collusion.
Post reply on HN