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

Samsung remotely disables TVs looted from South African warehouse

news.samsung.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 727 posts

Re: Samsung remotely disables TVs looted from South African warehouse

#81

Post by drewg123 »

hhsbz wrote: post #66
drewg123 wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I bought a high-end Samsung 4K tv in 2015 or so for about $3000. I picked it after a week of research that showed it had the highest quality panel. After taking delivery of the TV, we noticed it had bright lower left and right corners that we later found out were due to new packaging that pinched the TV and caused most of the TVs in that batch to be ruined. Samsung claimed that the corners were "in spec" and refused…

What do you expect Samsung to do, throw away a $3000 product for a defect most consumers wouldn't notice?

I expect them to either fix it, or replace it and re-sell it as refurbished. If most customers won't notice the defect, it should re-sell easily.

Re: Samsung remotely disables TVs looted from South African warehouse

#82

Post by kenned3 »

This is why i only buy "Dumb" TV's and connect a third-party "smart" device to them (Firestick, etc)

Smart device wants to do some crap like this, in the recycle bin it goes but the TV which cost far more is still good.

Many of these manufacturers also have a well documented history of not supporting anything they sold, in an attempt to push new products (buy an android phone and see how many updates it actually gets).

Again, far cheaper and easier to replace the smart device instead of the TV when this happens.

Re: Samsung remotely disables TVs looted from South African warehouse

#83

Post by anonuser123456 »

cyckl wrote: post #47
anonuser123456 wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh the tyranny of having to pay…

oh the tyranny of having a product which you purchase and think you own have all functionality be remotely disabled—effectively becoming a multi thousand dollar paperweight—at the whim of a large international corporation with no real recourse...

You have recourse by showing proof of purchase. Or you sue them.

Re: Samsung remotely disables TVs looted from South African warehouse

#84

Post by dpedu »

gambiting wrote: post #68
ollien wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Obviously that's not the point, here. The fact that Samsung has the ability to brick a TV remotely _at all_ is ridiculous. It's not hard to imagine this being used by an attacker to shut down all Samsung TVs remotely, or for planned obsolescence if you want to be more cynical.

Or.....against thieves. As someone who had stuff stolen, I'd pay money for electronics that catches fire once reported stolen, thieves are literally scum of the earth and only one step above murderers and rapists in my books. Great step by Samsung here.

You'd install a firebomb in your own home? I think you need to rethink this position.

Re: Samsung remotely disables TVs looted from South African warehouse

#85

Post by Lammy »

itsyaboi wrote: post #37
mrkramer wrote: post #19

"Should a customer’s TV be incorrectly blocked, the functionality can be reinstated once proof of purchase and a valid TV license is shared to serv.manager@samsung.com or click here for more information" Fuck off. This is a wake up call for us to make free and open source Smart TV operating system so we can stop this tyranny.

While I agree that smart TVs are a cancer, I'm confused by your take. Do you have the same opinion towards locking stolen iPhones? If not, why? https://www.marketwatch.com/story/apple-is-reportedly-disabl...

You don't usually carry your smart TV around with you in your pocket

Re: Samsung remotely disables TVs looted from South African warehouse

#86

Post by [deleted] »

dthul wrote: post #75
drewg123 wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One alternative is the Gigabyte AORUS FO48U 48" 4K OLED. This essentially an LG OLED, minus the smart TV stuff, plus better inputs. It seems to have a ~15% price premium over the TV.

That could be a nice alternative! In that case you do need a separate tuner though and something like a Chromecast if you want to watch Netflix. And you might not have easy access to extended channel offerings such as watching older episodes on demand etc.

[deleted]

Re: Samsung remotely disables TVs looted from South African warehouse

#87

Post by vorpalhex »

hhsbz wrote: post #66
drewg123 wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I bought a high-end Samsung 4K tv in 2015 or so for about $3000. I picked it after a week of research that showed it had the highest quality panel. After taking delivery of the TV, we noticed it had bright lower left and right corners that we later found out were due to new packaging that pinched the TV and caused most of the TVs in that batch to be ruined. Samsung claimed that the corners were "in spec" and refused…

What do you expect Samsung to do, throw away a $3000 product for a defect most consumers wouldn't notice?

What do you expect customers to do? Accept a $3000 defective product from a manufacturer screw up?

Re: Samsung remotely disables TVs looted from South African warehouse

#88

Post by sschueller »

Samsung should be permitted to have something like this until the unit is sold.

Once it is sold it is no longer theirs and any of these blocking features should be removed unless explicitly re-added buy the new owner. In fact why don't they charge extra for such a feature?

Re: Samsung remotely disables TVs looted from South African warehouse

#89

Post by lyx0 »

wait_a_minute wrote: post #36

I bought one of Samsung's smart televisions a couple years ago. I think I paid $1500 for it. Anyway, it started showing me ads and the TV eventually became sluggish less than a month after owning it. Returned it as defective. Ever since that experience, I swore of all smart televisions and will never buy another Samsung television or smartphone again if I can help it.

Same here, I bought a Samsung TV around 5-6 years ago and a year ago it started to show me ads all of a sudden in that 'Media Bar' (I have no idea what's it called, where you select the apps you want to use). A day later I factory reset it and gave it no access to the internet anymore and only stream to it from my PlayStation.

This made me swear off Samsung forever. Don't mess with my stuff I bought years ago.

Re: Samsung remotely disables TVs looted from South African warehouse

#90

Post by AdmiralAsshat »

dthul wrote: post #77
ollien wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I recently bought a TCL TV specifically because I trust Roku to maintain their software more than someone like Samsung. The ads drive me insane, even if they're relatively unobtrusive. At least in that case the TV was much cheaper (~$500 for a 55" TV)

I read some other thread on here some time ago that talked about the option of using a Pi-hole (or so?) to block smart TV ads.

Some TV manufacturers have gotten wise to this (sigh) and started hard-coding their DNS lookup IPs.
Post reply on HN