[HN Gopher] The downfall of smart TVs: From promises of seamless...
___________________________________________________________________
The downfall of smart TVs: From promises of seamless viewing to ad
tool
Author : PretzelFisch
Score : 452 points
Date : 2022-08-22 12:05 UTC (10 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (adguard.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (adguard.com)
| dmos62 wrote:
| The downfall of smartness: from promise of power to subjugation
| via data extraction.
| xoa wrote:
| 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). But they're often nice panels aimed
| at serious running hours, without this sort of junk (which would
| give enterprise IT conniptions) and can have very useful feature
| support like 802.1x authentication which so many devices still
| lack. Players like NEC will even advertise their use of an RPi
| compute and wink at lack of spyware [0] for some of their
| products, but lots of major "smart TV" providers also have a
| commercial lineup.
|
| I think they're well worth considering, particularly for the HN
| crowd, granted I suppose for people who truly want built-in
| netflix or the like without connecting something like a Roku or
| Apple TV maybe it's less optimal. But even they might change
| their tunes back to the concept of separate boxes and normal
| panels if they dislike all the ads and data tracking.
|
| ----
|
| 0: https://www.sharpnecdisplays.us/products/displays/me501
| LeifCarrotson wrote:
| OMG it has a carrier board for an RPi Compute Module built in:
|
| https://i.imgur.com/D3p8bCA.png
|
| That's amazing!
| jamesbfb wrote:
| Jeff Geerling talks about this very TV in one of his videos a
| while back: https://youtu.be/-epPf7D8oMk
|
| If my partner wasn't so hell bent in decor when choosing a
| TV, I would have loved one of these!
| OJFord wrote:
| Funnily enough that's actually featured in the images/video
| carousel in GGP's NEC link. Was surprised to see his
| 'YouTube thumbnail face' there!
| jandrese wrote:
| Wasn't the RPi hardware originally developed for a STB before
| being sold separately? Seems like it should be well suited
| for the task.
| yborg wrote:
| That NEC isn't a TV though, i.e. it has no tuner.
| jonhohle wrote:
| It would be interesting to know how many people use the tuner
| in their TV rather than cable, streaming, or the one in their
| DVR. Our TiVo use was supplanted by DIRECTV streaming in the
| past few years, but I don't think I've used the built in
| tuner in about 15 years.
|
| Is there any regulatory reason to include tuners in displays?
| andrew_ wrote:
| I wonder if something like this
| https://www.raspberrypi.com/products/raspberry-pi-tv-hat/
| could be used with the RPi capability
| adsfgdsafdasf wrote:
| its much easier to just buy any smart tv and not connect it to
| the internet
| jokowueu wrote:
| Or just get any smart tv and add a android tv dongle . They
| don't cost much
| afavour wrote:
| If you care about privacy absolutely do _not_ get an Android
| TV dongle. Get an Apple TV (though yes, they cost more. Maybe
| find a used one on eBay if you 're particularly price
| sensitive)
| gigel82 wrote:
| If you really care about privacy, don't get either. Apple
| is just as bad (or worse), they just have a really great PR
| team plugging away while they're building their ad mega-
| empire in the back.
| fmajid wrote:
| Apple is planning on adding ads to the AppleTV.
|
| https://www.bloomberg.com/news/newsletters/2022-08-14/apple
| -...
| bobsmith432 wrote:
| Now let me just open an ADB bridge with my Apple TV and
| install some third party applications, maybe flash a custom
| OS, rollback to an older firmware.
| afavour wrote:
| That doesn't negate my original point.
| bobsmith432 wrote:
| You literally have full control over what happens on an
| Android device most the time and Apple devices are always
| in a locked down walled garden where you have absolutely
| no idea what is going on with your data.
| blibble wrote:
| if you want to remove ads... buy a product (seemingly sold at
| cost) from google?
|
| seems odd
| workingon wrote:
| Luckily, Google has options to turn that stuff off. They
| could be lying about it, but it's better than generic TV
| brand which gives you no options, is a security nightmare,
| and is definitely selling every piece of data they gather
| to anyone who asks.
| anonymousab wrote:
| The problem is that you cannot turn off much of the smart tv
| junk, including things like ads. Paired with features such as
| the tv refusing to work if you don't periodically give it a
| valid internet connection (for it to send its cached metrics
| and download new ads, of course), which is slowly but surely
| becoming more common, and you're only marginally better off
| than just using the smart tv features.
| delecti wrote:
| > tv refusing to work [...]
|
| Is that really a thing? I'd never heard of it until this.
| Is that something that only kicks in if it has been
| connected at least once?
| anonymousab wrote:
| I've seen a few of them. They usually start with nudging
| for the first few weeks ("hey, you should really plug me
| in and get an OS update!") before eventually refusing to
| work at all.
| andsoitis wrote:
| You've seen a few TVs do this? What's an example so that
| I may see it for myself?
| psy-q wrote:
| Android TV now also comes with forced ads (since rebranding
| to Google TV).
|
| I was pretty upset when the very expensive Android TV gadget
| I bought (Nvidia Shield TV) specifically to have an external
| device without ads suddenly had them. They take up the upper
| third of the home screen.
| commoner wrote:
| It takes a bit of work, but you can replace the default
| Android TV launcher with an ad-free launcher, such as the
| free and open source FLauncher:
|
| - Instructions for changing the default launcher on Android
| TV: https://www.reddit.com/r/ShieldAndroidTV/comments/o96np
| c/ins...
|
| - FLauncher: https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=
| me.efesser.fla...
|
| - Source: https://gitlab.com/flauncher/flauncher
|
| This should work on any Android TV device.
| aembleton wrote:
| Thank you for this. I've now spent my evening going down
| a wormhole of launchers for my fire stick.
|
| Finally got it all working, with wolf launcher and some
| adb commands to set it up as the default.
|
| So much cleaner than the amazon launcher with its ads all
| over the.
| gpspake wrote:
| What they did to the shield was a tragedy. It was so
| refreshing to have a device that I could completely
| customized to remove ads and suggested content. I don't
| blame Nvidia I think this is more on the Google TV side. I
| still think the shield is the best TV box on the market. I
| keep meaning to look into loading a different launcher that
| will let me go back to the old style.
| wccrawford wrote:
| I have no proof, but I have a feeling nVidia is working
| to fix this problem. They were probably blind-sided and
| so it's taking a while, but I fully expect them to create
| their own launcher now to combat this. Their customers
| were quite upset about it.
| blibble wrote:
| if it's Google it's always going to have ads at some point
|
| sad
| thunky wrote:
| That's what I thought we well, but TFA seems to suggest that
| some TVs may overlay ads on top of any video source:
|
| "Vizio collected a selection of pixels on the screen and
| matched them to an existing database of content to find out
| what a user was watching and when"
|
| "pop-ups would reportedly appear halfway through the show and
| be injected into the users' own content, such as home videos"
| delecti wrote:
| If the plan is to get a TV (irrespective of it including
| "smart" features) and then use your own external dongle,
| then you'd have to be crazy to connect the TV to the
| internet. I think that must have been an implied
| instruction in the comment you replied to.
|
| I got a very nice "smart" TV, plugged in my own inputs, and
| entirely ignored that the TV had its own apps. It works
| just as well as a "dumb" panel would have.
| jasonjayr wrote:
| "Automatic Content Recognition" is scary, and seems to work
| regardless of the source of the image.
|
| https://www.bannertag.com/guide-to-automatic-content-
| recogni...
|
| I'm sure it's mentioned somewhere in the tome of text you
| agree to when you startup or unpack the tv. So clearly,
| everyone is okay with it. /s
| BitwiseFool wrote:
| >"So clearly, everyone is okay with it. /s"
|
| Cue the responses confidently dismissing the issue
| because there is some convoluted setup involving
| additional hardware and network configuration that _any_
| consumer can _surely_ set up if they don 't like what
| these products are doing.
| Daedren wrote:
| Yes, but the moment you plug in an Android dongle, Apple TV
| or similar, you can just disconnect the TV from the
| internet, which should solve this.
| xeromal wrote:
| You're going to have to put it in a faraday cage when
| they start including modems into the TV. lol
| Markoff wrote:
| Two can play this game if they provide free SIM card they
| should expect people hacking and freeloading this built
| in SIM card.
| xeromal wrote:
| I'm sure 1% of their users will do that. I'm also sure
| they'll still make money from ads.
| AtlasBarfed wrote:
| Yeah, but I don't want a dumb TV. Or the side-effort of some
| moribund commercial line that will also cost a ton more.
|
| You know what else kind of had this problem? Well, not the
| spyware as much, but just the crap software embedded: routers.
| OpenWRT appeared.
|
| It appears most smart tvs are already running linux, but
| probably in the way that android phones are already running
| linux.
|
| With android and smart tvs, the corps got a major foothold into
| managed computing platforms that they can control to do
| whatever spying was necessary. Firefox on the phone, ubuntu
| phone, etc, they couldn't break into Android, and nothing has
| broken into smart tvs.
|
| But man if there was an OpenWRT I could replace my roku TVs
| with, I'd probably do it in a heartbeat.
|
| It's not just that, my relatives have an old LG smart TV that
| long ago stopped adding apps. If there was an open linux
| alternative, it probably would be getting updates and AppleTV
| and Disney Plus would be options on it.
|
| Cursory searches have basically returned "man it would be hard,
| you'd need to know the board pretty well", yet ... aren't there
| armies of linux hackers that love hacking stuff like this?
| Seems like Smart TVs are a big, ubiquitous consumer item with
| privacy concerns that the linux hardware hacking community has
| treated with apathy. Which seems strange.
|
| Maybe all the hackers think "eh, plug a raspberry pi into a
| free HDMI port" or "eh, build a media pc".
|
| This is corporate big brother in your grandma's living room
| spying. This is freedom on the line, it's strange that the
| linux-as-hacking-freedom and the linux anticorporate crowd
| haven't jumped on this.
| _fat_santa wrote:
| I'm considering getting a 70" version whenever I get a house.
| While I've been renting I always just get the biggest and
| cheapest TV from the local electronics store.
|
| Besides not having the usual crap, I would imagine these use
| higher quality component since the TV's might be on 24/7. Even
| that 50" at just over 1k doesn't seem that bad, that's usually
| what you would pay for a high end 50" anyways.
| drcongo wrote:
| I ended up buying a Philips 55" gaming monitor instead of a TV.
| Seems to be the only way to get a high quality panel and proper
| HDR without spyware, most of the commercial displays I looked
| at didn't support HDR properly or had terrible panels.
| nesk_ wrote:
| 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.
| kornhole wrote:
| I don't know if you have been following the news about Apple
| expanding its advertising business. If you don't want a
| corporation collecting data about your viewing, you could
| modify your approach slightly and try kodi.tv. I have
| Librelec running on a RPI with attached SSD as house media
| server. The add-ons catalog is large and growing, but it
| won't have all the channels you might want.
| nesk_ wrote:
| Unfortunately yes, I saw the news about Apple. I'm waiting
| to see what will happen concretely, but I'm not very
| optimist. We'll see and maybe it will be time to move to
| another device :'(
| kornhole wrote:
| Your TV probably has more than one HDMI input. So you can
| try kodi.tv by repurposing an old computer you have
| laying around. I haven't yet convinced my partner to
| ditch her Comcast set top box. So we use both. Kodi is my
| first choice for viewing anything. The other box is being
| used less and less.
| lotsofpulp wrote:
| The "news" about Apple was Bloomberg guessing about
| Apple's plans with zero evidence. Pretty sad example of
| the success of clickbait.
| vonseel wrote:
| Does kodi / librelec have decent Netflix/Prime/HBO
| Max/Apple TV+ apps? I was under the impression they don't
| really support the big streaming apps and aren't really of
| use outside of watching torrented content.
| ospzfmbbzr wrote:
| If you can't wait for the p2p download then you are
| already lost.
|
| Needing the latest an greatest or not being able to wait
| a year to watch something means they already have you
| firmly in their grip.
|
| Just pay the media troll toll if you can't wait.
| Larrikin wrote:
| Haven't a lot of torrent sites gotten in trouble or
| implemented rules to mitigate against their sites
| providing content before the official release since they
| come out so fast and not always from official sources?
|
| I've never heard of issues of having to wait any
| significant amount of time from an official release on
| the streaming companies.
| vonseel wrote:
| Yea I've never seen a wait period after the official
| release either. This guy must be confused.
|
| Torrenting is great but TBH I'm not going to waste my
| time setting up Sonarr/Radarr and maintaining tracker
| accounts to torrent stuff that I can watch through
| services I already have access to.
| scarface74 wrote:
| Like I really want to deal with torrenting, Plex servers,
| etc. Been there done that. I travel a lot and don't want
| to deal with downloading media ahead of time.
|
| I also stopped pirating music the day iTunes was
| introduced
| stryan wrote:
| Kodi has Netflix and Amazon Prime apps that I've used.
| They get the job done, though they ain't pretty.
| vonseel wrote:
| What's the advantage over Plex then? I've installed Kodi
| before but it didn't seem nearly as polished as Plex.
| Plex is doing away with plugins but I've never needed
| those anyways for Movie/TV content.
| saxonww wrote:
| Kodi didn't the last time I checked.
|
| Note that unless you're running Windows or Mac, 4k from
| Netflix is not available anyway. In fact, _1080p_ would
| not be available, according to their system requirements.
| Linux tops out at 720p on both Chrome and Firefox. I have
| to assume this would extend to Kodi on whatever platform
| you 're running Kodi on.
|
| https://help.netflix.com/en/node/23742
| andrepd wrote:
| Correct, if you use Linux you can pay a monthly fee to
| Netflix for the privilege of installing spyware on your
| machine to view 720p video.
|
| Meanwhile torrents are a search away and they give me a
| no-nonsense .mkv file in 5 minutes, to watch wherever and
| whenever I want: phone, PC, TV, internet or no internet.
| The choice is easy.
| saxonww wrote:
| > for the privilege of installing spyware on your machine
|
| Not sure about this. Firefox and Opera both support 720p.
|
| But, because of their choices here - or the terms of the
| content deals they've signed, idk - Netflix doesn't get
| as much money from me as they could. 720p is not
| sufficiently better than 480p (to me) to warrant paying
| them for 'standard' service, let alone their premium tier
| at $20/mo. So I just get their basic service.
|
| Their loss, really, although collectively the Linux
| customer base is probably tiny enough that it's
| inconsequential to them.
| SECProto wrote:
| > Not sure about this. Firefox and Opera both support
| 720p.
|
| Don't you have to enable widevine to get Netflix in
| Firefox?
| saxonww wrote:
| Yes, good point, I don't typically think of that as
| spyware, but it is.
| OJFord wrote:
| Or the official apps right, that page is just about
| browsers (and implicitly unofficial apps)? So you could
| have the Kodi & Netflix apps on an Android TV (e.g.
| Nvidia Shield) device and have 4K Netflix.
| monkeynotes wrote:
| I imagine Netflix gathers a lot of viewing data, and I
| can see a time when ads make it into the streaming
| platforms natively. Cable TV started out as an ad-free
| offering, and now it's almost 50% ads.
| Mindwipe wrote:
| On some devices Kodi can pass through to the platform
| native DRM if that supports higher resolutions, but
| bluntly you will be wasting your life waiting for updates
| as it breaks constantly.
| kornhole wrote:
| It has some and more. There are many add on channels with
| content you won't find on any of the commercial boxes.
| For example, Films for Action is a great channel addon
| with a curated set of alternative films. They don't fit
| the desired narrative of commercial systems and would be
| difficult to get any airtime from corporate broadcasters.
| badpun wrote:
| "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.
| jtbayly wrote:
| How do you block internet if it will join open networks
| automatically?
| indeyets wrote:
| firewall by MAC-address
| dylan604 wrote:
| If it's a trully open network that say is you neighbor's,
| then there's no way you can control this filtering.
|
| The Amazon Sidewalk or whatever they had planned would be
| an example of this that might be less obvious than your
| neighbor just being bad at IT.
| dylan604 wrote:
| That process tends to require the use of a screw driver and
| the willingness to perform a bit of modifications.
| Markoff wrote:
| break antenna would be easiest solution, but you might
| possibly void the warranty while opening TV
| earth_walker wrote:
| Not giving them your money in the first place would be
| the easiest solution.
| nesk_ wrote:
| I just allowed my Samsung TV to connect to the wifi (to
| access the local network, because the Steam Link client is
| better on it than it is on the Apple TV) and then, on my
| router, I blocked all Internet access coming from the mac
| address of the Samsung TV.
| dylan604 wrote:
| At some point, these devices will be smarter than you
| about this. They will recognize a WiFi connection that
| cannot access the internet, and prefer an open network
| instead.
| jacquesm wrote:
| They will simply come with a cellular modem built in and
| you won't be able to block it. These things are so cheap
| now, and with virtual sims I think this is pretty much
| inevitable.
|
| At some point _everything_ will be internet connected
| just because the tech will cost pennies. We 're not there
| yet, but for a big ticket item such as a TV or a car it's
| either already there or about to happen.
| filoleg wrote:
| > They will come with a cellular modem built in, and you
| won't be able to block it.
|
| Haha, joke's one them. I live in a nice apartment in the
| middle of a major US city, and in my last 3 apartments,
| cell signal reception was ranging between 1 bar and no
| signal reception at all. Good luck with a built-in cell
| modem here.
|
| Thankfully, wifi calling is a thing working by default.
| So having almost no cell reception at home has exactly
| zero effect on my phone usage.
| reset-password wrote:
| The worry I have is TVs also embedding an Amazon Sidewalk
| chip. Seems like it would be easy for them to egress your
| data through your neighbor's spy device with something
| like that.
| dylan604 wrote:
| Is that really a specific chip or just their Alexa
| devices creating a shared WiFi network?
| filoleg wrote:
| I assume it is the latter, because that's what Alexa
| Sidewalk is. But that's a speculation, because neither of
| those currently exist in TVs, and I don't see LG or
| Samsung go along with it.
|
| EDIT: I stand corrected, Sidewalk isn't a wifi network,
| it is it's own LoRa network that's limited to barely
| 1Kbps (which, imo, only strengthens my original point).
| Thanks for pointing out that technical detail in the
| replies.
| dylan604 wrote:
| What's to go along with? Samsung and/or LG are not
| required to participate in Sidewalk. They just need to be
| given the ability to scan for open WiFi networks and join
| when found. They really don't even need to know the SSID,
| but of course they'll track that info as well.
| ThatPlayer wrote:
| Sidewalk is not wifi, it's their own networking based
| using LoRa, which has its own wireless spectrum and its
| own limits. For example bandwidth is limited to single
| digit kilobyte/s in best case. Of course real world usage
| is going to be worse.
| iso1631 wrote:
| Depends on the behaviour. On the times you've observed it
|
| 1) will it bounce between open wifi points if one does not
| allow internet access (set up a honeypot)
|
| 2) will it try open wifi if you join it to a secured wifi
| and block that traffic
|
| 3) can you send de-auth packets to any open wifi the tv's
| radio connects to
|
| 4) can you desolder the wifi antenna completely
| gruez wrote:
| It won't. Stories about it happening on the internet is
| plentiful, but actual evidence is scarce.
| coldpie wrote:
| Has there ever been any evidence of any TV doing this,
| ever?
| michaelmrose wrote:
| Honestly why wouldn't they connect to for example a cell
| phone tower or wifi hotspot ex xfinity wifi to download
| ads? Just pay whomever happens to ferry the ad to your TV
| a percentage of the take. Seems like this may well not be
| the case NOW but if I were planning to use a device for
| 10 years then a software updating adding this feature
| seems like a distinct possibility.
| delecti wrote:
| But _will_ it join open networks automatically? It is of
| course entirely possible, technically speaking, but would
| get any company actually doing that in a lot of trouble in
| most developed countries.
| sangnoir wrote:
| > but would get any company actually doing that in a lot
| of trouble in most developed countries.
|
| Why then is Amazon building out its parasitic WiFi
| network, if not to give unmediated access to its devices.
| I bet Amazon FireOS devices will do this very thing in
| the next 2 years, and not get into any trouble for it in
| the US
| blibble wrote:
| if it's that insidious let it connect to a dummy SSID that
| appears to be working but can't do anything useful
| xoa wrote:
| > _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._
|
| I'd be worried that's a losing battle long term though (maybe
| even short/medium term?), same with other hacks like running
| your own DNS and blackholing ad stuff that way. At the
| ultimate level, cellular modules and fixed data plans are
| getting real cheap, and for that matter for those living in
| denser urban/suburban areas I've heard people saying some
| stuff seems to be extremely aggressive about grabbing onto
| any WiFi they can find. But I could definitely see a point
| where everything comes with its own 4G module just for
| advertising usage (and maybe firmware updates so they can
| hang a fig leaf of "easier, no configuration!" over it). If
| we start having to talk Faraday cages for our TVs that's
| really hard to get around. Even purely in software they could
| use fixed DNS IPs to bypass simple user DNS, DoH to bypass
| users then trying to force all DNS traffic through their own,
| VPNs, and all the other ways everyone normally try to punch
| through aggressive firewalling with.
|
| You're right that at present it's often still feasible to get
| a hostile TV then neuter it. But I think it's better to just
| not have a fundamentally malicious device inside your setup
| at all if it can be helped. To me that's worth some money up
| front, and I appreciate that it exists.
|
| At the core and unfortunately it appears data harvesting and
| advertising really is quite profitable, and in a further grim
| twist those trying to avoid it might be even more valuable
| than the average. Which means the margins may exist on
| something like TVs to make it worth it to amoral
| manufacturers to get fairly nasty. That's a hard race as
| everything gets more and more integrated, vs just rewarding
| those who don't do it. Or else get laws passed with enough
| fines to change the equation!
| iso1631 wrote:
| It's a constant war, and most people don't care.
|
| The options are thus
|
| 1) Pay big bucks to avoid it (buying 42" monitors rather
| than 42" TVs)
|
| 2) Do clever things to work around it via cat and mouse
| (pihole, blocking traffic, wire mesh, desolder the 5g
| modem, etc)
|
| 3) Persuade people to care, so that a company starts
| building TVs at more reasonable prices but without the data
| capture
|
| This is a consequence of the fully optimised state of
| capitalism we live in
| A4ET8a8uTh0 wrote:
| Sadly, I agree. I am all but given up on #3 and basically
| resort to first 2 options for my own use. Most of my
| social circle equipped their houses with listening
| devices at every turn so my describing issues related to
| smart tv sound to them.. not even sure what. I am not
| even sure it registers as a valid complaint.
|
| At least with my objection to shoving ice cream cake into
| my 1 year old they listen. With electronics I might as
| well speak Swahili.
| rightbyte wrote:
| > But I could definitely see a point where everything comes
| with its own 4G module just for advertising usage
|
| I guess those Google Maps cars can hook up to everything
| they can while driving around your block without the need
| for sim cards.
| cma wrote:
| Before long a loose dog can run by with a smart tag and
| pick it up (Amazon Sidewalk).
| rightbyte wrote:
| I mean that is not even that far fetched. What would
| imply clinical paranoia 20 years ago is now everyday
| occurances.
| qwertox wrote:
| It's only a matter of time until these span their own Amazon
| Sidewalk-like networks and then possibly use the neighbors
| smartphone as a gateway.
|
| Like "my Samsung TV" <--> "neighbors Samsung TV" <-->
| 'neighbors Samsung Smartphone" (or skip the Smartphone if
| their TV is already connected without a properly set up
| firewall)
| kwanbix wrote:
| Why don't you just disconnect it from the lan/wifi?
| nesk_ wrote:
| Because of the Steam Link app, it's better at streaming
| good video quality than my Apple TV. I was really surprised
| by that but the app on the Samsung TV is wayyy better and
| doesn't drop half the frames.
| dylan604 wrote:
| >they come with an increased price.
|
| Do they, or do the consumer TVs come with a decreased price
| to make them more tempting as the manufacture knows they will
| make up that discount in selling the collected analytics?
|
| There was an article back some time now that showed how one
| brand was making more from the data sells than from the TVs
| themselves.
|
| Edit: It didn't take as long to find an example:
|
| https://www.extremetech.com/electronics/328967-vizio-
| makes-2...
| ska wrote:
| This isn't really surprising, as in general consumer
| electronics has famously thin margins. If you are in the
| race-to-the-bottom part of that, any other revenue source
| has an easy time moving the needle.
| jcpham2 wrote:
| FWIW we just upgraded to a 98" NEC "commercial display" C981Q
| and couldn't be happier with it. I looked into the Raspi
| compute module but we just have a PC and some Crestron gear
| running it all, Shure ceiling tile mic and a vladdio cam.
|
| It was $8500 + 1500 freight IIRC
| SayMyName wrote:
| You can still get cheap ones. And by cheap I mean TLC/Hisense
| level quality displays. Walmart sells Sceptre's for low prices
| and have no smart features, best purchase I've made in years.
|
| We use a lot of Rokus here and my issue isn't the ads, its that
| every Roku built-in TV gets REALLY slow after a few updates, so
| now it's just easier to chuck a $20-30 device instead of having
| to buy an entire $300+TV.
|
| Sure I don't get 120Hz fancyness but at least it's 4k and the
| picture is good enough for my consoles.
| madelyn wrote:
| +1 to Sceptre TVs! Recently (past week) bought a 4k Sceptre
| TV and it was less than $200. 60hz, looks great, the smartest
| feature it has is a clock you have to set yourself.
|
| Just make sure not to buy the android or roku ones!
| bluedino wrote:
| > every Roku built-in TV gets REALLY slow after a few updates
|
| My Samsung TV just seems buggy. Certain apps like YouTube
| will choke on certain videos, down to the point of just
| randomly rebooting the TV.
|
| And newer apps (like Peacock) never get released for the
| version of the software that runs on my TV.
|
| I guess at some point we'll just either buy a new TV, or
| maybe now that Apple 'fixed' the remote I'll dig the Apple TV
| back out.
| Aloha wrote:
| I dont like 120Hz refresh, it looks weird. I see it a whole
| lot on bad 4k transfers of older movies, they're either doing
| a 3:2 pulldown or something else to up convert the scan rate,
| but no matter what it is, it makes the motion look weird and
| excessively fluid.
| pkroll wrote:
| 3:2 pulldown is taking 24fps film and making it work in
| 29.97fps TV video, generally with a couple interlaced
| frames. If you're seeing something "excessively fluid" the
| TV is interpolating frames. Which I love: 24fps needs to
| die. But a 120Hz refresh TV can also display 24 fps
| exactly, by showing the same frame 5 times, if the
| manufacturer has provided such a mode. 60Hz TVs cannot
| display 24fps without judder or interlacing
| _fat_santa wrote:
| I bought a Sceptre last year and one of the hilarious things
| about it was it had the "lite" Roku interface, just your
| input selections with no smart features. Those TV's are
| fantastic for the price assuming they don't fail (and even
| then it could be argued that it's still a good deal).
| dmix wrote:
| I bought a TCL with smart features and there's no ads and I
| just dont connect it to wifi.
|
| The Firestick 4k Max I got for $75 advertises prime shows
| occasionally (unobtrusively) but the UI is 2x as fast as my
| Chromecast so I very happily use it w/ IPTV, Airplay, and
| streaming apps.
| brewdad wrote:
| I have a Firestick 4k Max on our main TV and a standard 4k
| stick on the other TV. They just work compared to my Shield
| TV which always seemed to fighting my home theater setup. I
| got them through a Prime deal, so I think I spent a total
| of $75 for both.
|
| I've been tempted by some in-app features that only seem to
| work on AppleTV devices but not enough to spend that much
| when my current devices do the job so well.
| insightcheck wrote:
| I was curious and looked up reviews for Sceptre, but
| according to some discussions on Reddit, they have build
| quality issues. One of the threads [0] had a discussion on
| picture quality and build quality issues.
|
| Another subreddit [1] even has an automoderator comment that
| says getting a smart TV and not hooking it up to the internet
| is the best option. The automoderator also writes that if one
| is certain about going non-Smart, then one should "look at a
| projector or a Commercial Display. A projector means you will
| also 100% need audio with it. A Commercial Display or
| Hospitality TV you could pay up to twice or even more for the
| same TV (or worse) without smart features."
|
| However, I'm not sure how reliable that automoderated comment
| on r/4kTV is.
|
| [0] https://old.reddit.com/r/hometheater/comments/a25d5m/are_
| sce...
|
| [1]
| https://old.reddit.com/r/4kTV/comments/qt9wvf/nonsmart_tvs/
| cma wrote:
| Not hooking it up to the internet soon won't be enough with
| Amazon Sidewalk and other related efforts.
| SayMyName wrote:
| Imagine when you have to "activate" your tv to use it.
| akozak wrote:
| There is the dystopian version of always connected, but
| it'd be nice to get firmware updates (supposing those
| updates mainly fix bugs, add features, improve
| performance).
| SayMyName wrote:
| I'd rather just upgrade firmware by downloading it and
| using the usb port.
| jbverschoor wrote:
| The cheap ones also have a blazing fast non-android menu.
| This was my last samsung
| Arrath wrote:
| > gets REALLY slow after a few updates
|
| The curse of smart TVs, I swear.
|
| My TV pops an error and says it's still powering on if I try
| to change inputs right after turning it on.
|
| Yet, if it is turned on by a device, like I begin casting to
| my chromecast, or turn on my xbox, it'll go to that input
| immediately no problem.
| jollyllama wrote:
| I worked at a place where they conference room TV's were
| showing ads for games, netflix. Everybody else looked at it as
| normal but my TV at home doesn't show ads, so it seemed
| ridiculously unprofessional to me. Just like when Windows shows
| ads in the start menu, etc. I don't see how people get used to
| it.
| NaturalPhallacy wrote:
| From what I've learned the key to search for is "hospitality
| display".
|
| First result from brave search:
| https://www.samsung.com/levant/business/smart-hospitality-di...
| humanwhosits wrote:
| 'smart' is in the title which is a bit concerning
| tablespoon wrote:
| > 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.
|
| Do they have tuners? I've heard many of those are missing them.
| cheschire wrote:
| If this is a major concern for you, I think you'll be happy
| to hear that tuners are ridiculously cheap, with built in
| recording capabilities for under $30. I suspect if you're in
| the market for one of these pricier TVs and willing to pay
| the premium then the extra cost for an external tuner unit
| will be not be a major factor. For cleanliness you can attach
| it to the rear of the TV and use short cables.
| tyingq wrote:
| I'm very happy with the Tablo tuner + dvr device. You can
| place it near the antenna, since it has WiFi. Then, you use
| it from a Roku/FireTV/etc app. It's more than $30, but they
| do sell refurb models. And you connect your own storage
| device, so no markup on space.
| tzs wrote:
| Tablo looks interesting. I don't see any power
| consumption figures on their site, though. I'll have to
| contact them and see if they can tell me.
|
| My house sufficiently blocks TV signals that with an
| indoor antenna I only get a couple channels well, and a
| couple more intermittently. With an outdoor antenna I can
| get all those well plus several others.
|
| However the good places for an outdoor antenna from a
| reception point of view are terrible from a grounding
| point of view.
|
| So what I was thinking of doing is putting in an outdoor
| antenna but not having it electrically connected to the
| house. There would be either no ground or ground to a
| grounding rod at the antenna site that is not tied to the
| house ground, and the coax from the antenna would go to a
| weatherproof box near the antenna. The weatherproof box
| would contain something like a Tablo or Amazon Recast,
| and a battery powered power supply.
| 9991 wrote:
| Do you want the propaganda piped directly into your living
| room?
| mmmpop wrote:
| The media has the best interests of emotionally-healthy
| people in mind. Just turn on some TV and relax.
| bobsmith432 wrote:
| tablespoon wrote:
| > Do you want the propaganda piped directly into your
| living room?
|
| If I didn't, why would I have a TV at all? /s
|
| But you did a poor job of derailing a thread into one about
| you and your opinions that are only tenuously related to
| the topic. You should have mentioned how you "don't even
| own a TV" and how your choices are so much better than the
| sheeple's choices.
| [deleted]
| nsgi wrote:
| Which brands of smart TV show ads? I live in the UK and I've
| had three different brands of smart TV (Philips, Samsung and
| Toshiba) and my experience with all of them has been pretty
| good. Netflix, YouTube, etc. have worked pretty well and I
| haven't seen any ads that weren't linked to the apps
| themselves. Perhaps they're tracking me in ways I don't know
| about, though?
| account-5 wrote:
| My Samsung TV shows ads in the bottom app bar. Or did until
| it was disconnected from the internet. Crappiest TV I've ever
| had, slow and just all around a bad experience. I would love
| a dumb TV with decent panel in UK! Any suggestions are
| welcome.
| ViViDboarder wrote:
| Samsung displays them in the main menu unless blocked. I run
| a network ad blocker that takes care of it for me though.
| doublerabbit wrote:
| I bought my mother a Sony TV which displays an iPlayer
| notification on every tv show on any BBC channel.
|
| "Press Green to see the show from the beginning on iPlayer"
|
| You can't turn it off and will only go away if you remove
| iPlayer. While it's not an advert, it's still annoying
| spyware.
| BozeWolf wrote:
| Samsung frame. Hardware: It has physical netflix, prime,
| somethingelse buttons which immediately switch to that app
| without asking if you want to close the current app.
| Frustrating when you accidentally sit on your remote. So i
| modified my remote, put tape underneath the buttons to
| disable them.
|
| Software: In menu ads, sometimes, for some crap thing like
| tennistv. I have no idea how to disable it.
|
| The fucking frame store is inbetween apps and starting point
| of the menu. Alyways need to do 4 (or 5, depending on ad)
| times to the right before being able to run the app you want.
|
| It started playing samsung tv. After a week. I hate tv. Took
| me a day to get annoyed enough and then spend an hour to
| disable the shouting XL Americans.
|
| So, typical Samsung. Software ux just sucks. Luckily a tv is
| mostly turned off* and that is why I bought it; hardware
| looks great when it's off.
|
| *off: it always switches to the frame mode. It is a laughable
| gimmick. Ever seen a painting giving light? You cannot
| disable it (i assumed it was possible). Long-hold power off
| to turn the tv off. Else frame mode. Sucks.
|
| We need to save energy here in Europe. @Samsung: please fix
| it.
|
| I thought i would not use thr smart functions, but I use it a
| lot. Tune-in radio and spotify work great. Also a lot of
| youtube and national tv app are pretty good. Airplay works
| fine too.
|
| Recommend it? No. Happy with it... just enough to not return
| it.
| m463 wrote:
| > So i modified my remote, put tape underneath the buttons
| to disable them.
|
| This is genius - I will do this for the footshoot buttons
| in my remotes!
| nemothekid wrote:
| > _You cannot disable it (i assumed it was possible). Long-
| hold power off to turn the tv off. Else frame mode. Sucks._
|
| I have this TV; you long press the power button to turn it
| off. The entire gimmick of the TV is the art mode, as the
| actual panel isn't very good and you can buy the TV without
| the gimmick for several hundred dollars less (A regular 65"
| Samsung Frame is ~2K, while the normal 65" QLED is $1,200).
| My gripes about samsung software aside - it's an odd thing
| to complain about.
| d35007 wrote:
| The person you're talking to hates TV, so they bought
| this one because it looks nice when it's turned off. I
| wonder if they're really frustrated with another person
| in their home who enjoys watching "shouting XL Americans"
| on the idiot box.
| ajross wrote:
| If you want a TV-priced display for use as a dumb monitor, just
| buy a TV and don't give it a wifi password. My main desktop
| monitor is a 43" Roku/TCL thing that is still running the
| factory firmware. Works great.
| mlichvar wrote:
| One issue with TV displays I didn't see mentioned here is
| glossiness. TVs are mostly glossy and monitors are usually
| matte. I strongly prefer the latter.
| entropicgravity wrote:
| I also am not fond of TV's that snoop on everything in my living
| room and spew out unwanted ads. But recently I had to buy a new
| TV. Here's my setup.
|
| The TV is an LG 55" model OLED55C1 (could be a Costco specific
| model number), _very_ good color and sound. I expect to keep it
| for ten years or more as I did with my previous LG plasma.
|
| Next I got an Asus PN51 Ryzen 3, very cute, small and quiet mini
| computer (had to add an SSD and memory). I loaded the latest
| Linux Mint onto it and used an HDMI cable to connect it to the
| TV. The TV was not happy about not being connected to wifi
| (that's what the PN51 is for) but eventually it succumbed.
|
| The final piece is a Logitech MX Ergo wireless blue tooth mouse.
| The result is fabulous all around as a TV and a computer.
|
| So all in it's about $2k USD which is a lot up front but given
| the hours of use by our household over ten years it's probably
| the best value I've bought since my last TV.
| CivBase wrote:
| Is there anything holding back an OpenWrt-style project for TVs?
| I can imagine something like that becoming popular among hacking
| communities if TV manufacturers ever resort to installing SIM
| cards.
|
| For now I just don't connect my TV to the internet and it works
| just fine. My laptop, an HDMI cord, and a Logitech K400+ makes
| for a much better experience than any smart TV interface.
| jerrysievert wrote:
| "smart" tv's remind me too much of 3d tv's. those were a fad for
| a while and the only non-3d tv's you could buy were high end
| retail displays. they are thankfully gone now.
|
| I wanted a higher quality display than what a retail display
| could offer me, so I chose a "smart" tv that has oled with an
| appletv connected. as long as I never hook it up to ethernet or
| wifi, it acts as a "dumb" display and I can use only the appletv
| remote.
|
| I really look forward to good displays being panel and sound only
| again.
| MarcScott wrote:
| I don't own a smart TV. If I were to buy one, am I forced to
| connect it to my WiFi before I use it? Can't you just use one
| without an internet connection?
|
| My dumb TVs have Chromecasts attached. I know I'm handing my data
| to Google, but I don't (yet) have to put up with injected
| commercials.
| vonwoodson wrote:
| tl;dr; disable Automatic Content Recognition (ACR)
|
| It also doesn't help that my privacy is always (*ALWAYS*) wrapped
| in some platform specific jargon.
| cerol wrote:
| Is there an end to the Data Age (r)?
|
| Sometimes I have this interesting thought, that someday, when
| even the oldest people alive will not know or will not remebered
| how things worked back then. Then someone, or a group of people,
| will suddenly rediscover, or reinvent (as we always do throughout
| history) things that today still exist. Maybe someone will come
| up with "shops where you are served by real people", or paying
| for content you watch. Or a "shopping mall, but without cameras"
| ("but who will be watching me?"). Or a vehicle you can drive
| yourself.
|
| I know it's a silly philosophical thought. But what it points to,
| for me, is that data harvesting works because it trades privacy
| for convenience, and even if it's too little, there are ways to
| opt-out (the trivial case being opting out of convenience). But
| it's a much too thin line to thread.
|
| People are aware of the massive commercial surveillance. They
| just don't care. Human society is built upon trust or its lack
| thereof. When trust can't be established, surveillance arises. It
| only becomes a moral problem when it is done asymmetrically, and
| in an unprecedented scale.
|
| When is too much too much? When your TV starts showing ads, even
| when unplugged from electricity? When you have to watch an ad to
| start your EV car (unless you purchase the Quick Start+ package
| for 9.99/mo)? You can take a break from ads today. That, in a
| way, ensures that you can consume ads for longer. But industry
| seems to be moving in the direction of eventually leaving you
| with no way to opt out. Then, the convenience might not be worth
| it anymore. That means either a market demand for ad-free
| products, and a subsequent return to pay-for-content business
| model, or some sort of social turmoil.
|
| Or maybe that's their plan to get us to consume less: just stick
| everything with insane amounts of obnoxious ads, so we won't buy
| anything anyway.
| 2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote:
| I like it. They keep making it easier to read more books!
|
| "I find television very educating. Every time somebody turns on
| the set, I go into the other room and read a book." - Groucho
| Marx
| blueflow wrote:
| The URL is borked
|
| Edit: fixed!
| Overtonwindow wrote:
| I bought my first TV as an adult last year. I'm 44. I barely use
| it...
|
| The problem I had with Smart TVs (Samsung then return to get the
| LG) are their absolutely abysmal system performance. Jerking,
| stuttering movement, menus that lag, a counterintuitive
| controllers, and streaming services usurping the experience; I do
| not want a permanent Disney+ button!
| madduci wrote:
| Don't connect a smart TV to a network, ever. Instead, use a
| Google TV, Apple TV or a RPi running Kodi (and maybe PiHole?) for
| a Smart experience without all the bloat.
|
| It's cheaper to replace the external device than replacing a TV.
| afiori wrote:
| Probably correct URL: https://adguard.com/en/blog/smart-tv-ad-
| blocking.html
| tgv wrote:
| 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!
| afiori wrote:
| Did not read; I just looked for the likely URL.
| [deleted]
| tomkaos wrote:
| Both my smart tv are not connected to internet, I just use
| chromecast and my phone for everything since 8 years. I just hope
| google never break this.
| Taylor_OD wrote:
| I run an hdmi cable from my laptop and have a bluetooth keyboard
| with a scroll pad on it. My wife doesnt like it. But its so much
| faster than a "smart tv". My issue isnt even the ads. Its that
| half of these tvs feel like they are running on low memory
| because of how slow they are. Add in the streaming apps that
| crash just often enough to be really annoying...
|
| I wish it didnt have to be that way.
| spywaregorilla wrote:
| Yeah these threads pop up on HN all the time and everyone
| starts talking about apple tv and roku whatever and I think
| they're all... pretty dumb.
|
| HDMI + Computer is just the best answer. Works in hotels just
| fine. I'm not aware of any smart TVs that push ads over your
| connected devices feed even if you do let them update for no
| good reason. Keyboard and mouse is better than remotes. Web
| search is the best search. You can use streaming sites. It's
| basically free. You can... use it as a living room computer.
| Hit up spotify and now it's also your sound controller. Have
| browser tabs. Play videogames.
| wilsonnb3 wrote:
| PC's are intentionally gimped to prevent trivial copyright
| infringement.
|
| Netflix forces you to use Edge on Windows or Safari on
| Firefox to stream in 4k because they integrate with the OS's
| DRM.
|
| HBO Max doesn't allow 4k at all on PC's but I think will at
| least do 1080p if you use an approved browser.
|
| I don't think Hulu will stream anything higher than 720p
| regardless of which browser you use. Disney+ is the same.
|
| Good luck getting anything over 720p running Linux and
| Firefox.
| spywaregorilla wrote:
| I think a pleasant user experience in 1080p is a great deal
| personally.
| asdff wrote:
| I also think 4k is oversold. From the couch 10 feet away,
| a 4k tv and 1080p tv will look the same.
| lots2learn wrote:
| You can get the native windows apps of the streaming
| services to get 4k without using Edge
| squarefoot wrote:
| Signage displays are the solution, that is, those big screens
| used in malls, airports, stations etc. they're sturdy built and
| guaranteed to work 18/7 or 24/7, so don't expect to pay them like
| a shiny but crappy consumer Smart TV. However pay attention
| before buying since manufacturers started to add Android based
| crap and "smart" features to them as well. Usually the lack of
| any networking, both Ethernet and WiFi, on their technical sheet
| is the indicator they're dumb enough to be worth of trust. This
| arrangement of course requires an external receiver since they're
| essentially beefy monitors. They also make almost-dumb TVs for
| the above markets.
|
| As for the brands, I'm aware of Swedx.com in the EU and
| Sceptre.com in the US. Samsung also makes some interesting
| products employing the Tizen OS (any jailbreaking available?). I
| don't have any direct experience with any of those however.
| jaclaz wrote:
| Being very bad at any commercial initiatives, most probably I am
| way off, but I think there could be a market for some "enhanced"
| versions of those "universal" TV/LVDS boards to replace the
| internals of new TV's.
|
| Something loosely along the lines of:
|
| https://diy.viktak.com/2014/02/giving-new-life-to-lcd-screen...
|
| I.e. in a perfect world you could be able to buy a (subsidized by
| ads) "smart TV" and (voiding the warranty) be able to replace the
| innards with a "dumb" card.
| mark_l_watson wrote:
| 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.
| coldcode wrote:
| I need a 4K TV since mine is only 2K but the only non smart TV
| I've found are at Walmart, the Sceptre brand. Does anyone know of
| any other?
| haunter wrote:
| https://www.sharpnecdisplays.us/products/displays/me501
|
| With commercial displays usually the problem is to find a
| dealer who is not doing B2B only
|
| https://www.ebay.com/itm/234299003266
|
| https://www.beachaudio.com/nec-multisync-me501-me501/
| swayvil wrote:
| Raspberry PI + OpenElec + dumb tv + Pirate everything
|
| Not one single filthy obnoxious advertisement. Ever.
|
| Access to the WHOLE media library.
|
| Do it today.
| ilitirit wrote:
| YouTube's advertising strategy is pushing me to get rid of my
| SmartTV, or at least find a 3rd Party solution to completely
| block the ads. I was completely fine with one or two 6 second ads
| randomly playing before a video, or during a lengthy video. Then
| they added 14 second ads, which was very annoying, but bearable
| since it's about the same length as the two short ads.
|
| But now they're advertising _even if I simply open the app_.
| Furthermore, they 're "hiding" 14 second ads behind the shorter 6
| seconds. I've even seen _41 minute advertising content_. I 'm
| guess they're banking on users leaving the app on "autoplay" to
| dupe advertisers into thinking that people actually consume this
| trash.
|
| These days I just cancel every ad out of principle until the
| video plays. This takes on average 6-7 attempts. But now more
| often than not I just quit the app completely. So they are
| depriving their own content creators of views. And then they have
| the gall to present surveys asking what my advertising experience
| has been like...
| whimsicalism wrote:
| I have actively returned to using my computer to watch YT/Hulu
| because the overhead of seeing the ads is just too high on our
| TV.
| 12ian34 wrote:
| Same. I have Google TV and YouTube in there for me is now
| unusable due to the number of ads. It feels like it's gotten
| twice as bad in the last 6 months.
|
| On Android, I use Newpipe (via F-Droid). On laptop/desktop I
| use uBlock and SponsorBlock which do a great job together.
| fossuser wrote:
| Pay for Premium - YouTube is one of the few services that
| actually lets you pay to stop the ads, it's worth it.
|
| I wish that also fixed all the bad product design that results
| from building something corrupted by ad incentives.
|
| You can also disable all tracking in settings.
| unsupp0rted wrote:
| I pay for YouTube premium and although it stops Youtube's
| ads, the in-video ads from content creators are much more
| distracting and annoying.
|
| My brain can easily block a banner ad or tune out until the
| "skip ad" button appears. But when a content creator spends
| 90 seconds on message and then jarringly shifts to trying to
| sell me a mattress or a water bottle (Linus Tech Tips) for
| the nth time, that makes the video lose all value for me.
|
| Content creators gotta eat, I get that. But the ad-supported
| model is garbage.
| fossuser wrote:
| Yeah, I don't like that either but that's really on the
| creator. I prefer the patreon model or at least when they
| put ads at the end.
| clusterhacks wrote:
| Honest question, how many creators do you support via
| patreon or similar?
|
| I subscribe to some very niche content creators on YT and
| am a YT premium subscriber. One of the creators I follow
| has 200,000+ subscribers and is very open about the fact
| that without his patreon supporters that his channel
| would be unsustainable.
|
| This was surprising to me - I (naively?) thought more of
| my premium subscription would trickle down to my
| subscription channels and that 200,000 subscribers would
| be enough to make a channel at least somewhat self-
| supporting.
| fossuser wrote:
| I pay for 4 annual substacks, but I don't use patreon.
|
| I generally have a rule where I won't pay for something
| if it doesn't remove the ads. The podcasts I pay for have
| private links that have ad-free versions (except for
| Honestly which I'm on the fence about paying for because
| of it).
|
| YouTube premium removes ads, but patreon often doesn't.
|
| I think I'd seen some YouTuber with around that many
| subscribers say they make ~20k/yr? So it's not nothing,
| but definitely not enough to be full time. The bigger
| ones with millions of subscribers like MKBHD and such I
| think do really well (7 figures?), but I'd guess a lot of
| that is extra stuff like the sponsored deals and merch
| stores etc.
| ilitirit wrote:
| I don't have a problem with ads in general - I have a problem
| with how they are currently presenting ads. It was never this
| bad in the past, and I honestly I'm not sure I want to pay
| money to a company who uses these predatory techniques.
|
| 40 minute ads? Who even does this? The only way someone would
| even consider watching this _instead of the content they
| actually clicked on_ would be if someone let it autoplay.
| This is the kind of thing my 5 year old nephews would do.
|
| Absolutely disgusting predatory behaviour...
| _fat_santa wrote:
| With YT I pay for Premium. With how many ads they throw in to
| videos now I find it very worth it.
| ZeroCool2u wrote:
| Also, you get YT Music for free with YT Premium. I absolutely
| won't tolerate ad interruptions, but I find that with the
| amount of content, and utility, I get from YT overall, the
| family plan is quite a good value at $14.99/Month. Plus, YT
| Music recommendations are shockingly good. Probably the only
| recommendation engine I've experienced from any of the FAANG
| companies that consistently recommends new music I like.
| mrweasel wrote:
| YouTube do have a paid option, which doesn't have ads (unless
| the content creator has some sponsorship deal). It is the
| subscription service I get the most value from. Based on a few
| videos from content creators, it also seems like it's a good
| deal for them. I think Linus Tech Tips phrased something like:
| It matters much more than you think. Other have shown data
| suggestion that Premium customers contribute as much as 20 to
| 30% of the revenue.
|
| Having used a device, not my own, to view videos while not on
| YouTube Premium, I do have to say: You can't really watch
| YouTube without the subscription anymore, the experience is
| just awful.
| sligor wrote:
| The paid option is very expensive. I would pay for an ad-free
| only Youtube, but this option is not available in my country.
| I already pay for Spotify and Netflix. So I don't care about
| other services of youtube premium except ads-free
| mrweasel wrote:
| If you don't need/want YouTube Music, then yes, it's way to
| expensive. If I where to buy today, I would get the version
| without YouTube Music, and replace it with a service where
| more money goes to the artists.
| acd wrote:
| Please lets stop calling devices which spy on people "smart".
|
| Dumb devices are smart for privacy. Smart devices are dumb for
| privacy.
| elf25 wrote:
| torh wrote:
| An update to my tv changed it from having a clean startup screen
| to give me ads for shows on network I don't have, and I hate it
| with passion.
|
| Ironically they have a button that says I can customize the
| screen, which means I can add more crap, not take anything away.
| cube00 wrote:
| The new Google TV launcher complete with ads on an expensive TV
| or a Shield is getting a hammering in the ratings, shows how
| little they care about customer feedback.
|
| https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.google.and...
|
| Bonus points for making the preview images in the store not show
| the ads you'll see. If any other app tried to mislead users like
| that they'd be banned from the store.
|
| Although it's not like we have a choice, they've also disabled
| the option to change the launcher on the newest Android TV
| version as well to coincide with adding the ads on the home
| screen.
|
| I get we need to have ads to pay for services but come on, the
| TVs they're doing this to are not your cheap Aldi ones, they're
| high end Sony Bravias. Most of the ads are even for other paid
| services like Disney+ and Netflix.
| Invictus0 wrote:
| Google is just a vehicle to get their employees promoted. It's
| not a serious company with vision or strategy.
| scarface74 wrote:
| Don't buy hardware from an ad company - problem solved. Why do
| you think Google got into the TV streaming business?
| drcongo wrote:
| The first time I saw a TV advertised with Google as the OS I
| laughed out loud thinking "who in their right mind would buy
| that?!", but then again, quite a lot of people buy a phone
| with it so I guess there's enough people out there who simply
| don't understand why it's problematic.
| jayd16 wrote:
| >who simply don't understand
|
| Most likely they do and their pros/cons calculation is just
| different from yours.
| cube00 wrote:
| Sony and nVidia are not ad companies.
| scarface74 wrote:
| In fact that are. They are selling TVs cheaply subsidized
| by ads.
| cube00 wrote:
| When I first purchased my TV there were no ads on it. The
| ads came later when Google updated their Android
| launcher. So, where's my discount?
| scarface74 wrote:
| Why do you think Google - an ad company - was trying to
| get into the TV market?
| corney91 wrote:
| I don't have time nor the information to second-guess
| possible future motivations of every company in a supply
| chain before buying a product. Most people won't even
| realise Google provide the software for a lot of these
| products.
| scarface74 wrote:
| Yes because it takes great insight to know that a
| _Google_ based product probably exists to gather
| information about you for targeting advertising. It's not
| like Google is some obscure company.
| BoGs83 wrote:
| I have the same problems and it enraged me. It enraged me to
| the point where I back flashed the nvidia and blocked all
| domains to _.google_.com at the pihole for that mac address.
| Above that all NAT for DNS and blocking DoH and DoT. I do not
| need "new firmware" versions as the software I run on nvidia
| shield is just fine.
|
| I unlock the shield, manually install the apps I want updated
| and ignore the rest. It has no external internet so meh if its
| got zero day exploits open.
| vorpalhex wrote:
| You can still adb your way to freedom but it's not a solution
| for average users.
| dabeeeenster wrote:
| My solution is https://nextdns.io/ with a special TV profile that
| has basically all adblock lists added to it, and then some.
| benhurmarcel wrote:
| I use this but it works intermittently. It seems the Samsung TV
| randomly decides not to use the DNS IP I put in its settings.
| sphars wrote:
| I also use NextDNS for my home network. They specifically have
| a section for native tracking protection (Privacy tab -> Native
| Tracking Protection) for some of the major consumer electronics
| brands, including Samsung and Roku. With that option I've never
| seen an ad on my Roku TV, works great.
| steviedotboston wrote:
| BestBuy has plenty of non-smart TVs in their insignia brand
|
| https://www.bestbuy.com/site/searchpage.jsp?_dyncharset=UTF-...
| samgranieri wrote:
| I'll never allow a tv in my house to connect to the internet. I
| just stream everything via my apple TV set top box. Nice
| separation of concerns.
| uptown wrote:
| At home, I've never connected my TV to my network. The few
| firmware updates I've needed to do were applied using a thumb
| drive, and I use an AppleTV as my interface.
|
| When I travel, I bring along an AppleTV and plug the HDMI port
| into their set. This lets me keep the services I subscribe-to and
| use them with their display. This has worked great until my most-
| recent rental, which had a RokuTV -- presumably setup on Wifi.
|
| When content was streaming from my AppleTV, Roku would overlay a
| panel along the bottom-part of the screen proposing that I can
| watch what I'm currently watching from a variety of other
| providers. This must mean that the TV set is analyzing the video
| or audio signal to fingerprint what the content contained, then
| matching it against a library of content to feed into its profile
| of my use.
|
| This is the first time I've seen something like this. I'd always
| assumed that if you used the TV's UI and if it was connected to
| the internet, then you'd probably be subject to their ads and
| data analysis, but it never crossed my mind that they'd perform
| the same data-analysis over any signal passing through its
| silicon.
|
| Is this commonplace or is Roku the first of what's likely to be
| many doing the same?
| marcinzm wrote:
| >At home, I've never connected my TV to my network
|
| The next (already there?) steps are the TV automatically
| scanning for open wifi network to leverage and/or having a
| built in 4g connection.
| dmurray wrote:
| Or partnerships between the TV company and the ISPs, to put
| additional wireless networks on their consumer routers that
| are accessible to the TVs.
| fmajid wrote:
| Comcast does this in its routers, and no longer allows you
| to opt-out. They also have all the advertising ecosystem
| integration, of course.
| sangnoir wrote:
| That's why one should never use ISP-provided routers.
| Since ISPs can update/control devices connected to their
| network, buy a modem without WiFi: anything downstream of
| that is _your_ network.
| runnerup wrote:
| Or Amazon Sidewalk for the mesh network version of this.
| rovr138 wrote:
| Samsung and Huawei are doing 5G,
|
| https://www.techradar.com/news/samsungs-5g-8k-tv-promises-
| to...
|
| https://www.techradar.com/news/huawei-is-
| developing-a-5g-8k-...
| HeckFeck wrote:
| Cynical, sly enthusiasm. I just can't imagine 5G bands
| devoted to adverts passing invisibly through my skin. It is
| too much like the adverts in your dreams skit from
| Futurama.
|
| Again, it is increasingly hard to separate satire from
| prophesy.
| marcinzm wrote:
| Maybe in the future the TV will play barely audible ads
| when it detects you're asleep.
| indeyets wrote:
| Don't give them hints!
| chaostheory wrote:
| Not everyone lives in higher density housing, so open wifi
| networks are not always a given. Also a built-in cellular
| modem would be antithetical to having a lower cost TV set
| based on ad subsidies.
|
| I would worry more about mesh networks like Amazon sidewalk
| boring_twenties wrote:
| Amazon has had "free" cellular service in their Kindles for
| over a decade, I'm pretty sure TVs have more margin than
| that.
| scarface74 wrote:
| I love my ATV 4K. But it's useless for traveling since hotels
| require you to login and the AppleTV doesn't have a browser.
| The Roku sticks get around this by temporarily exposing a pass
| through wifi connection that you can connect to from your
| phone/computer and log in to your hotel's wifi.
|
| The only work around with the AppleTV is to buy a second travel
| router.
| Steltek wrote:
| For travel, I have a Raspberry Pi with a second wifi stick to
| transmute hotel wifi into my own local network. This avoids
| having to modify every phone/tablet/Chromebook/Switch the
| family has in tow or fight with buggy hotspots. I keep
| meaning to add a VPN back to home (mostly for performance)
| but I haven't got around to it yet.
|
| An upgrade I keep looking for is an external directional
| antenna so I can get a stronger signal when RVing.
| scarface74 wrote:
| You're really over complicating things...
|
| A travel router will do the trick.
|
| https://a.co/d/4Y6UwOE
| boring_twenties wrote:
| For some people, myself included, configuring a Raspberry
| Pi to do this would be simpler and take less time than
| figuring out TP-Link's bullshit web interface.
|
| Not even to mention, you can be 100% sure you can get
| whatever extra features you need working, such as the
| aforementioned VPN.
| drcongo wrote:
| I have a spare AppleTV for travelling and have never had a
| problem connecting it, even before tvOS 15.4. The router
| suggestions are also overcomplicating it. Just connect your
| phone to the WiFi, then choose the same network on the
| AppleTV and stand near it - a sheet pops up on your phone
| asking if you want to share the password with the AppleTV.
| scarface74 wrote:
| I'm in a Hilton hotel right now. You don't get a standard
| Wifi password. You go to a web page where you enter your
| room number and last name and then your MAC address is
| allowed for a certain amount of time.
| drcongo wrote:
| Ahh damn. Does signing in on the phone first not work?
| I'm struggling to remember what the captive screen wanted
| last time I did it, it's been a while.
| scarface74 wrote:
| No. It doesn't. That's where the travel router came in.
| It presents itself as one MAC address using one of its
| radios and exposes another interface for your devices. I
| was staying in an extended stay and we had computers and
| a WiFi printer set up. We were waiting for our house to
| be built.
|
| I was just informed that Apple added support for captive
| networks in March.
| drcongo wrote:
| Ahh, got you. Yeah, that does sound like a pain.
| drcongo wrote:
| Also, I've never tried it, but can't one just tether the
| Apple TV to the phone?
| scarface74 wrote:
| Then you have to use your data plan. At least with the
| previous AppleTV, you could AirPlay directly from your
| iPhone to your AppleTV without the AppleTV being
| connected to an external Wifi network.
|
| It didn't work with all iPhone apps though. For instance
| it didn't work with Netflix.
| js2 wrote:
| With tvOS 15.4, "Captive Wi-Fi network support on tvOS allows
| you to use your iPhone or iPad to connect your Apple TV to
| networks that need additional sign-in steps, like at hotels
| or dorms."
|
| https://developer.apple.com/documentation/tvos-release-
| notes...
| scarface74 wrote:
| I did not know that. Thanks
| darknavi wrote:
| Wow this is great, thanks for posting this!
| [deleted]
| a4isms wrote:
| > I'd always assumed that if you used the TV's UI and if it was
| connected to the internet, then you'd probably be subject to
| their ads and data analysis, but it never crossed my mind that
| they'd perform the same data-analysis over any signal passing
| through its silicon.
|
| This is discussed in TFA. It's "ACR" (Automatic Content
| Recognition), and it applies to anything you watch on that TV,
| via any mechanism you try. Yes, if you hook up your AppleTV and
| look at your own videos, the TV is watching what you watch.
|
| Today, it's comparing a fingerprint to a database. Tomorrow a
| new model or a firmware update will have it shipping your
| pixels to the mothership and doing things like determining who
| else watched the same video.
|
| And if this isn't enough, you also have to ask yourself: _What
| is your SmartTV doing with the camera facing your hotel room
| and the built-in microphone?_
|
| If a manufacturer uses ACR on content you brought in through
| the HDMI port, do you trust them with a camera and microphone
| pointing into your hotel room or home?
|
| If you do trust them not to abuse that, do you trust them to
| keep all their TVs up-to-date with security patches to prevent
| hackers from exploiting them and taking over the cameras and
| microphones?
|
| ---
|
| I can do this all day. Remember, it's not paranoia if there
| really is a trillion-dollar surveillance capitalism industry
| out there buying and selling data, and laundering data so that
| companies can buy it while having plausible deniability that
| they were knowingly involved in any illegal or brand-damaging
| shenanigans.
| WASDx wrote:
| This is spyware.
| ezfe wrote:
| >When content was streaming from my AppleTV, Roku would overlay
| a panel along the bottom-part of the screen proposing that I
| can watch what I'm currently watching from a variety of other
| providers. This must mean that the TV set is analyzing the
| video or audio signal to fingerprint what the content
| contained, then matching it against a library of content to
| feed into its profile of my use.
|
| My Roku TV specifically said it didn't analyze HDMI inputs,
| only Roku channel watching
| stevage wrote:
| I'm really glad that our "smart TV" just pre-dates all of this
| stuff. It can't connect to a network - it doesn't have that
| functionality. Firmware updates? No idea if there are any.
|
| Yuck, yuck, yuck.
| vonseel wrote:
| How is your TV a "smart TV" if it doesn't connect to
| networks?
| Markoff wrote:
| same, except I go even further and instead other online thingy
| I just use USB driver loaded with movies/TV shows for me and
| kids, I don't understand nowadays people addiction to
| streaming, offline experience is much better/smoother, i decide
| what I wanna watch on computer and just load it to drive
|
| but I guess some people can have moral reasons to pay for some
| service and/or it's not legal in their country to download and
| watch video content for free (though many EU countries allow
| this)
| Aardwolf wrote:
| > The few firmware updates I've needed to do were applied using
| a thumb drive
|
| What kind of firmware updates do you need to do on it, when its
| only purpose is to act as a screen?
| uptown wrote:
| >What kind of firmware updates do you need to do on it, when
| its only purpose is to act as a screen?
|
| My display had an issue where the video modes necessary for
| the XBOX Series X were not working properly. The display
| would drop-out in some 4K modes. It's stable now, so I
| haven't checked/updated anything in about a year.
| Chouhada wrote:
| > What kind of firmware updates do you need to do on it, when
| its only purpose is to act as a screen?
|
| On some screens, signal processing has been significantly
| improved in later firmware versions. New features are also
| not uncommon, such as VRR and HFR being added after
| release[1]. This is particularity nice for modern consoles.
|
| [1] https://www.flatpanelshd.com/news.php?subaction=showfull&
| id=...
| traspler wrote:
| There can be all kinds of fixes and features in the FW for
| the various display modes. From SDR to HDR to audio settings.
| bombcar wrote:
| Most of the firmware upgrades are to keep the "smart" parts
| working, but sometimes they fix actual bugs.
| phil21 wrote:
| > Is this commonplace or is Roku the first of what's likely to
| be many doing the same?
|
| As far as I can tell, it's not only commonplace but ubiquitous
| for any new TV you buy these days.
|
| I recently moved and had to buy a number of TV sets over the
| years to outfit various guest rooms. All LG and Samsung TVs
| I've setup over the past 3 years have a "feature" like this you
| can manually disable if you dig down through menus enough.
|
| Then every firmware update the flag gets reset to enabled of
| course :)
| SergeAx wrote:
| My LG TV plays movies from USB stick and never tried a trick
| like this. Not gonna lie, those were mostly relatively old
| movies, like LOTR or Heat, but also latest Predator
| installment.
| grumple wrote:
| This is a hyperbolic article that doesn't reflect reality for
| most people.
|
| I use my smart tvs for two purposes: 1) to use the native apps
| for streaming services (and I never get ads except the internal
| advertising of the apps themselves), and 2) to connect my
| personal devices (computers, game systems). The native apps are
| much more convenient than using an external device for my non-
| techy partner. I stream to another TV from my devices via HDMI
| and a switch.
|
| For most "cord-cutters" that use only streaming services, I
| expect them to have similar ad-free experiences.
| jeffbee wrote:
| Seconded. I use Hulu, Disney+, Apple TV, Prime, and YouTube on
| my smart TV at various points in time and I never see ads. And
| I have my Switch, Chromecast, and Blu-Ray player hooked up. In
| fact the only place I see unexpected ads is on the stupid Blu-
| Rays.
| guidedlight wrote:
| The latest Sony TV's that offer Google TV can leverage "Basic
| Mode" which disables the 'smart' functionality leaving you with a
| dumb TV with best-in-class picture quality.
|
| It's perfect to pair to the device of your choice (Roku, Apple
| TV, Media Server, Xbox, etc).
|
| https://support.google.com/googletv/answer/10408998?hl=en
| rendall wrote:
| Does Sony have a history of remotely disabling or otherwise
| changing their hardware features? Because if they do, this
| Basic Mode is at their pleasure.
| monksy wrote:
| It should be noted that Vizos used to not show ads. But now in a
| firmware update my tv is now forcing you to go to their smartcast
| input option that shows ads.
|
| You can't disable that in the settings.
| rendall wrote:
| > _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 canceling and going back to P2P.
| Fuck 'em.
| blibble wrote:
| I cancelled prime due to those prerolls
|
| I've already bought the service... why show me ads for it?
| weberer wrote:
| They already started showing ads to people with Twitch Prime a
| few years ago. It seems like its only a matter of time.
| mrweasel wrote:
| If you're paying for Twitch Prime, but still getting ads,
| then what are you paying for exactly? Less ads?
|
| Sadly I think it's what happens when companies are pushed to
| generate more and more profit each year. So you you start
| just a few ads to the paying users, because: "They won't mind
| one short ad" and then suddenly it's all ads all the time.
|
| It does make you wonder exactly how ads are so profitable and
| which products are paying the whole thing. It almost can't be
| electronics, because ads apparently help finance TVs and
| phones as well.
| hhjinks wrote:
| Isn't Twitch Prime just the extras you get alongside a
| regular Prime subscription? I'm pretty sure Twitch Turbo is
| the no ads thing.
| mrweasel wrote:
| Ooooh, I forgot that Amazon owns Twitch. That makes more
| sense then.
| woogley wrote:
| You're correct, though until about 2019 or so, Twitch
| Prime included no-ad viewing
| haunter wrote:
| >If you're paying for Twitch Prime, but still getting ads,
| then what are you paying for exactly
|
| One free monthly sub + all the free games and DLCs. Cost me
| 4EUR a month and I also have access to the Amazon Prime
| Video catalog. It's a very very good deal.
|
| There is Twitch Turbo which removes ads but it's an
| entirely different product https://www.twitch.tv/turbo
| sjsdaiuasgdia wrote:
| While not a solution for every Twitch viewer, sending the
| video from a browser or the Android app to a Chromecast
| device gets rid of ads.
| matheusmoreira wrote:
| Completely agree. Advertising is NOT okay, ever. There is no
| acceptable amount of advertising. I couldn't care less how much
| money it costs them.
| welder wrote:
| > 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.
|
| Not just that, it also means having thousands of companies know
| every show or movie you ever watched:
|
| > [tv manufacturer] shared IP addresses of its consumers with
| the data aggregators who then would find a person or a
| household to which it belonged.
| brewdad wrote:
| I dumped Prime a couple months ago. So far the only consequence
| has been having to use an alternate platform to watch a
| specific movie and I have much less random "stuff" arriving in
| my mailbox/front porch now that I have to give some thought
| about shipping costs for cheap items.
| 1ncorrect wrote:
| Advertising needs to become as socially acceptable as smoking.
|
| It indiscriminately pollutes the environment, and inflicts harm
| on non participants by incentivising unbridled data collection.
| werds wrote:
| this is a bit silly
| AlexandrB wrote:
| 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).
| whimsicalism wrote:
| Cigarettes cause cancer. Some people (not me) actually
| get value from ads and AFAIK they don't cause cancer.
| afavour wrote:
| Cigarettes also feel great to the people smoking them.
| A4ET8a8uTh0 wrote:
| This actually is a very valid argument. Cigarettes
| actually provide value to the user. Yes, there are
| negatives, but the user typically knows those and decides
| the upside is worth the risk.
|
| Do people know the risks of being profiled by ad
| companies? I am not sure most people can even begin to
| understand the associated risk. The few attempts to show
| people what companies know about you were shut down
| pretty hard.
| kadoban wrote:
| No direct cancer, no, they only affect what you think,
| feel, say, eat, drink and do.
|
| Edit: also who you vote for, what laws are passed, who
| goes to prison, who lives and who dies. But no they don't
| _directly_ give you cancer.
| matheusmoreira wrote:
| > Cigarettes cause cancer.
|
| So did the ads that told people to smoke. They were
| banned precisely because they were driving behavior that
| causes harm.
| themitigating wrote:
| Do you have evidence as to the negative mental effects
| and how bad they are?
| jeromegv wrote:
| It's been discussed for years in dozens of articles on
| hacker news and everywhere. At this point the burden is
| on you to show us on how being plugged to social media
| 24-7 is not harmful.
| Workaccount2 wrote:
| The hard, spikey, jagged, foul tasting pill to swallow then:
|
| Society needs to pay directly for content.
| BitwiseFool wrote:
| I remember paying for DVDs and being forced to watch
| trailers after putting the disc in the tray. Even when we
| directly pay for content they can't help but add
| advertisements.
| Invictus0 wrote:
| Society doesn't pay enough for TV as is? No one even wants
| the hundreds of channels they stuff into the cable
| subscriptions.
| kadoban wrote:
| 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.
| afavour wrote:
| 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.
| cmiles74 wrote:
| Strong disagree on this one. I'm pretty sure someone
| looks at the service that lacks (to their mind)
| sufficient advertising and is making decent revenue and
| thinks something like "Wow, a couple (more) ads and this
| could make _a lot_ more money! " And then (more) ads are
| added.
|
| Unless there's some dis-incentive we can expect to see
| more ads in more places. People abandoning the service
| doesn't seem to be enough, I suspect the longer someone
| has a particular service the more they become accustomed
| to it and the more pain it takes to get them to move to
| another service.
| mjhay wrote:
| 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.
| falcolas wrote:
| This is my expectation of the market, based on at least
| the following two points:
|
| 1) Video games are sold at full price and still include
| ads and microtransactions
|
| 2) Cable TV was originally ad free (and marketed as
| such), until they realized they could include ads and
| make even more money.
|
| I hold the opinion that executives at many of these
| companies hold the view, "Why only get some of our
| customer's money when we can get all of it?" (though they
| probably word it differently, something about recurring
| revenue and monetizing the existing customer base).
| ryandrake wrote:
| > Cable TV was originally ad free (and marketed as such),
| until they realized they could include ads and make even
| more money.
|
| This is why I laugh whenever some new ad-free service
| launches. People forget history and then are surprised
| when it repeats itself. Any service that touts itself as
| "the ad-free version of X," will eventually be stuffed
| full of ads.
| cheschire wrote:
| Video games are not sold at full price. 20 years ago the
| average game price was $50. The price point was
| universally increased to $60. In Europe the price point
| has scaled beyond that but in the USA the price has
| stayed $60. 20 years of inflation has not be accounted
| for in that price. 20 years of technology improvements
| leading to increased art team demands, etc.
|
| And to top that off, the frequent mass sale events on
| popular game distribution channels have led to a culture
| of people not purchasing games UNLESS they are on sale.
|
| I'm not a fan of the implementations they have selected
| to make up for that, but it's a bit disingenuous to imply
| that all money making on top of the $60 cost is
| profiteering.
| falcolas wrote:
| > 20 years of inflation has not be accounted for in that
| price
|
| With all due respect, the inflation argument sounds good
| but is not based in the reality of the market. Other
| folks have gone into a lot more detail on why this
| argument is badly flawed.
|
| But to pick a single argument: if the inflation argument
| was valid, companies - both AAA and indy - would be
| unable to make a profit without selling
| microtransactions. But those games and companies they
| _are_ turning profits. Even companies selling games with
| microtransactions are getting record profits when you
| discount recurring revenue - microtransactions.
|
| See Digital Devolver. See God of War.
| nightski wrote:
| Yeah but look at how large the market is, and how much it
| has grown since then. I'd imagine it's at least 10x the
| size and it costs virtually nothing to sell to all those
| additional customers. That's the real reason video game
| prices haven't kept pace with inflation.
|
| Valve has proven with lots of data that holding deep
| discount sales actually greatly increases revenue. It
| took a long time for the industry to fully realize this.
|
| They are not simply trying to cover costs. It's indeed
| charging what the market will bear. Which I have nothing
| against, I'm more upset that gamers fork over cash for
| all these micro-transactions. But that is another topic.
| bobsmith432 wrote:
| scarface74 wrote:
| Where does the myth that cable TV was ad free come from?
| Cable TV was never as free. Cable was first introduced to
| bring broadcast TV - with ads to places that couldn't get
| reception.
|
| Then the "Superstations" like TBS and WGN came to cable.
| They were local broadcast channels that used satellites
| to broadcast nationwide to cable companies.
|
| Then came cable TV channels like CNN, ESPN, MTV etc with
| ads.
|
| Cable TV has always had ads.
| falcolas wrote:
| For something that's supposedly a myth, the expectation
| was spread broadly enough that the NY Times wrote an
| article about it.
|
| https://www.nytimes.com/1981/07/26/arts/will-cable-tv-be-
| inv...
|
| Also, there were some Cable TV channels, sometimes
| bundled with other channels, that explicitly did not have
| ads (HBO, to name one), just to complicate things
| further.
| scarface74 wrote:
| I've seen that article before.
|
| Cable never marketed itself as being ad free
|
| > Although cable television was never conceived of as
| television without commercial interruption...
|
| HBO has always been a premium add on to basic cable. Just
| like it is today and it still doesn't have ads.
|
| > But scores of big companies, including General Foods,
| American Express, Procter & Gamble and Pepsico, are
| already cable advertisers, along with innumerable used-
| car dealers and other local businesses that can afford
| cable's relatively low rates.
|
| > Many cable channels have yet to begin operating, and
| those now running commercials, such as Ted Turner's
| 24-hour Cable News Network or U.S.A. Network's ''You''
| program for women, carry 30-second and one-minute
| commercials that are a standard feature of regular
| television.
| brewdad wrote:
| In my area, cable absolutely marketed itself as being as-
| free. Perhaps by the time it reached your area the ad-
| free dream was already dead.
| scarface74 wrote:
| How could they? The big draw of cable TV was
| rebroadcasting network OTA channels that had commercials.
| They then added superstations.
|
| If you look at the earliest basic cable channels, they
| also had commercials from day one.
| asdff wrote:
| Even if you are paying full price, inevitably the
| complany will have some brilliant CEO who figures out
| that not showing ads constantly is leaving money on the
| table.
| kadoban wrote:
| Even that doesn't really work. I'm "not paying full
| price" only because they force upon me hundreds of
| channels that I don't want, including really pricey ones
| like every sport. The bullshit I actually watch, I'd be
| shocked if I'm not paying more than full price for.
|
| The real problem is that content creation/disribution
| industries are addicted to ridiculous pricing and
| distribution policies. Nobody can buy what they want, at
| reasonable terms, we're stuck with them playing stupid
| games that hurt everyone (likely including themselves).
| zyx321 wrote:
| The only channels that promised fewer ads because you pay
| for it and delivered on it (not switching to double
| dipping within a decade) are the ones financed by
| mandatory TV license fees.
|
| People do pay and it does not work. The only thing that
| works is government regulations.
| jordanpg wrote:
| There is also a class component to ads.
|
| I find ads intolerable, but I am privileged enough to be
| able to afford to make them go away in almost all cases.
|
| For those on a very tight budget, Disney+ with ads,
| Kindle with ads, podcasts with ads, etc. are the only
| thing that is affordable.
|
| I suspect for many in the lowest income brackets,
| traditional cable TV with good old fashioned commercials
| is a primary source of entertainment.
|
| Thus, we also need to keep in mind that those who cannot
| afford to make commercials go away are subsidizing this
| further for those who can in an unfortunate irony.
| skyyler wrote:
| This might seem crass but if I was in a situation where I
| couldn't afford the ad-free version of a streaming
| service, I would simply abstain from the service
| entirely.
|
| I understand many don't care, but I hate ads with an
| intensity I cannot describe with words.
| BeFlatXIII wrote:
| Which means realistic micropayment solutions must be
| discovered first.
| tomjen3 wrote:
| We already do that, since ads presumably make the companies
| money. Thus the overall effect of this should be that we
| make products cheaper, since they won't have to pay
| marketing budgets.
|
| Network effect companies (e.g Facebook) would see how
| useless their network effects are when only some are
| willing to pay, and they therefore can't get all their
| friends updates.
|
| And most creators will find out just how little their
| content is worth (you probably need to be in the top 50%
| just to make pennies per hour).
|
| I would say bring it on, but most sites would run into the
| problem that for their media customer it wouldn't be worth
| the effort to click the apple pay (or whatever) button to
| get access.
| bfhchnds wrote:
| Not quite. A while back we used to pay for cable tv and the
| programming used to have tons of ads. Now, we assumed the
| premium you pay for Apple products was because 'you' were
| not the product, unlike say Android, but looks like with
| some clever marketing about privacy focus Apple was just
| building up their own ad business.
|
| I think paying for content/product doesn't ensure you wont
| see ads, well perhaps it doea but until the company decides
| it needs higher margins.
| waynesonfire wrote:
| It's not that simple. The demand to reach a target
| demographic isn't going away. Thus, as the difficulty of
| reaching that demographic increases so does the cost
| advertisers are willing to pay.
|
| Also, it's common for companies to offer a paid service and
| then double dip with an advertisement offering as well.
| matheusmoreira wrote:
| Pay for games? They shove ads in them, game engines even
| have support for this.
|
| Pay for subscription services? They show you ads for their
| own shows at best or half a minute of paid advertising
| before every episode at worst.
|
| Pay for anything at all? They track everything you do
| whether you pay or not. Worse: now they know you have
| disposable income since you're spending money on frivolous
| entertainment. The value of your attention just went up and
| so did the opportunity cost of not advertising to you. The
| more society pays, the more annoyed the executives get at
| the money they're leaving on the table.
|
| What society needs to do is make advertising illegal. Just
| straight up prohibit it, consequences be damned. No buts,
| no compromises.
|
| https://99percentinvisible.org/article/clean-city-law-
| secret...
| freeone3000 wrote:
| 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.
| themitigating wrote:
| 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.
| ahelwer wrote:
| Subsidized doesn't mean anything in this context. These
| services aren't offered below cost, they're very
| profitable. Companies will always view not showing ads as
| leaving money on the table, regardless of how much profit
| they're already making.
| h1fra wrote:
| Well I paid for a TV, cable network, netflix, disney plus,
| hbo, prime, switch, playstation and still got tracked and
| ad displayed.
|
| I'm a huge advocate of paying for content and artist (when
| you have the budget for) but what they are doing has
| nothing to do about it.
| lapetitejort wrote:
| People call me crazy for paying for reddit and YouTube
| premium. The fact is, they're some of the few places where
| I can pay directly to host the servers and pay the
| creators. I won't considering using any other social
| network where I can't contribute directly, versus
| indirectly with my data and eyeballs.
| InCityDreams wrote:
| The uk's BBC isnt that hard, spikey, jagged or foul.
| JumpCrisscross wrote:
| > _Advertising needs to become as socially acceptable as
| smoking_
|
| I'll hold my drink while you convince America why it should
| pay 10x for a TV because ads are bad.
| Beltalowda wrote:
| Last time I bought a TV was about 10 years ago, IIRC I paid
| EUR350 for it and it had no "smart features" at all and I
| assume Samsung made a profit on it. Or do you want to tell
| me that Samsung ate a EUR3k loss to give me a TV?
|
| This is just silly; TVs can maybe made a little bit cheaper
| by some ads, but not much, and TVs were plenty cheap for a
| long time well before "smart TVs with ads" became a thing
| (my TV wasn't a luxury model, but not the cheapest either).
| earth_walker wrote:
| America has always paid 1x for a TV without ads.
|
| It is the TV and media companies that are a) using lies and
| deception to convince America that it's ok to instead pay
| (1x + advertising + a hidden loss of privacy) for a TV, and
| b) colluding to raise the prices of 'dumb' TVs as an added
| lever against consumers.
|
| Educating people on the _real costs_ , and pointing out
| better alternatives are the best ways to combat this.
| matheusmoreira wrote:
| Advertising requires views which drives engagement
| optimization which results in addictive design. Binge
| watching of TV shows, excessive social media usage, video
| game addiction have all been linked to depression, anxiety.
|
| Convince people? Any ban on advertising is already likely
| to enjoy significant public support. There's precedent for
| this.
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cidade_Limpa
| zppln wrote:
| Yup. It's kind of incredible how these platforms are fucking up
| their services. Like, all they had to do was to provide the
| content in a way more convenient than pirating, but they've
| managed to go down a path where the experience get more and
| more user hostile by the day.
| Workaccount2 wrote:
| In my experience, most users are aloof idiots and do not even
| notice it.
| secret-noun wrote:
| It feels like a Clockwork Orange's aversion therapy eyelid-
| clamper thing sometimes.
|
| I mute the volume for ads to take away some of that edge. It's
| one of the few things I can control about it.
| vonwoodson wrote:
| 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.
| unclebucknasty wrote:
| It's the principle.
|
| This probably sounds over the top, but at some point it feels
| like they're saying they own you. You're paying them for one
| service, and they'll unilaterally decide it's not enough and
| they are going to make more money on you. But they don't do it
| via a price increase that gives you a fair opportunity to
| decide on the value exchange. They just start shoving this
| stuff on you.
|
| And worst of all, it's your time they're taking to do it. The
| one thing there's never enough of, and that you'll never get
| back.
| sjamaan wrote:
| This puts into words a feeling I've had for a very long time,
| thank you!
| matheusmoreira wrote:
| It's not just our time! It's also our limited attention. They
| think they have a right to it, they even think they can sell
| it off to the highest bidder. As if it belonged to them.
| the_snooze wrote:
| A lot of consumer-facing tech follows the same dynamic as an
| abusive relationship. "I want to know everything about you
| and who you talk to." "I decide what's best for you." "You
| can't leave."
|
| I can't help but conclude that the engineers complicit with
| this are deeply broken people.
| m463 wrote:
| It should be mentioned that "advertising" is not "showing an
| ad". it is collecting and selling detailed information about
| people's activities and behaviors.
| have_faith wrote:
| 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 on my machine.
| Markoff wrote:
| You could just use last good version.
| Datagenerator wrote:
| Just cancelled Disney+ with the one worded reason: commercials
| themitigating wrote:
| It doesn't have commercials and there will be a less
| expensive plan that does have them but that's optional. So
| your reason is wrong.
| flanbiscuit wrote:
| Disney+ is going to have ads?
|
| ... just googled it:
|
| So they are _adding_ a new plan that's cheaper and ad-
| supported, and they are not touching the current plans. So
| nothing will change for my current subscription plan
| thankfully.
|
| > Disney+'s ad-free subscription tier, which currently costs
| $7.99 monthly and $79.99 annually, will remain available.
|
| and this:
|
| > What's more, if the Disney+ profile being used is
| associated with a child, no ads will play.
|
| source: https://tvline.com/2022/05/17/disney-plus-with-ads-
| subscript...
|
| edit:
|
| A clarification for the advertising to kids things. Looks
| like it's no ads to preschool kids
|
| > Regarding kid-targeted ads on Disney+, Ferro said, "Yes,
| we're going to have advertising... to kids, but it's going to
| be controlled advertising with a lot of parental levers to
| pull. We're not going to collect data on that." She added
| that there won't be advertising in preschool content on
| Disney+ at launch.
|
| source: https://variety.com/2022/digital/news/disney-plus-
| advertisin...
| jsnell wrote:
| > Disney+'s ad-free subscription tier, which currently
| costs $7.99 monthly and $79.99 annually, will remain
| available
|
| But it will not remain available at that price. Instead
| that's what the plan with ads will cost, and the prices of
| the current ad-free plan will be bumped up by 30%.
| TheRealDunkirk wrote:
| We all knew this was introductory pricing to weasel into
| the space. This was even the predicted timing.
| anonymousab wrote:
| And that ad-free plan will eventually have ads. Ads are
| infectious and will always spread uncontrollably once you
| let them in. Give an inch and they will take a lightyear.
| flanbiscuit wrote:
| oh I missed that, I'm only just finding out about this
| now. Can you point to where you read that?
|
| I just found this contradiction to what I had mentioned
| earlier (going to edit my original message)
|
| > Regarding kid-targeted ads on Disney+, Ferro said,
| "Yes, we're going to have advertising... to kids, but
| it's going to be controlled advertising with a lot of
| parental levers to pull. We're not going to collect data
| on that." She added that there won't be advertising in
| preschool content on Disney+ at launch.
|
| https://variety.com/2022/digital/news/disney-plus-
| advertisin...
| jsnell wrote:
| The new prices are here:
|
| https://dmedmedia.disney.com/news/ad-supported-disney-
| plus-s...
|
| > Premium (No Ads) $10.99
| petesergeant wrote:
| > So they are _adding_ a new plan that's cheaper and ad-
| supported, and they are not touching the current plans. So
| nothing will change for my current subscription plan
| thankfully.
|
| Fundamentally the problem with paying for ad-free content
| is that the people who can afford to pay for it are the
| people advertisers want to target.
| rendall wrote:
| Wow. Thanks for the head's up. I have Disney+ and have not
| yet seen this, but I'm done as soon as it does.
| scarface74 wrote:
| It's not true. Disney+ is adding a lower cost ad free tier.
| The current plan doesn't have ads.
| zerocrates wrote:
| They're just actually introducing the ads at the current
| pricing level, and adding a higher "no ads" level. Of
| course they would have ended up there soon enough anyhow,
| but they're just doing it immediately.
| djbebs wrote:
| That lower cost ad plan is the same cost as the current
| plan with no ads.
| darkwater wrote:
| Now. Just like when food companies sells the same package
| as before (or a slightly bigger version) as "now with 20%
| free product!" and after a few months, they remove the
| free product discount. Price increased, less people
| noticed it.
| scarface74 wrote:
| I'm sure people will notice if for instance HBO only sold
| a version with commercials after having an ad free
| product since 1980.
| darkwater wrote:
| Sure. But Disney+ in 12 months will have the ad-based
| version at today's ad-free prices. (And the ad-free
| subscription at a premium price.
| scarface74 wrote:
| Ok. We all knew that $7.99/month was unsustainable long
| term.
| pbhjpbhj wrote:
| Really, I assumed Disney+ would basically be all profit.
| Can you link info about the size of the loss they're
| making?
| scarface74 wrote:
| https://www.investors.com/news/disney-earnings-disney-
| stock/
|
| > The Dow giant still expects Disney+ to be profitable in
| 2024.
|
| Disney+ isn't profitable once you take into account
| "transfer payments". They may not be profitable at all
| yet. But they specifically mentioned being profitable
| including transfer payments.
|
| That basically means that when Disney movie studios use
| to sell streaming rights to another company - say
| Netflix. They may make for instance $500 million (made up
| number). Disney+ still "pays" the Disney movie studio
| $500 million. It's counted against Disney+ profits. Of
| course the Disney company as a whole keeps most of that
| money. But it still has to pay part of it to the actors,
| producers, etc who have a revenue share agreement.
|
| It was a big point of contention when Black Widow was
| released.
| darkwater wrote:
| That's text-book financial engineering. I understand the
| creators' concerns, especially the ones that signed
| contracts before Disney decided to create Disney+, but on
| the Disney side I really don't care. It's more, I'm
| explicitly hostile to it due to the balkanization of
| streaming platforms now that every big producers start to
| have their own end-user distribution, subscription-based
| service.
| scarface74 wrote:
| It's not "financial engineering". It's standard
| managerial accounting. I'm an MBA drop out and studied
| this over 20 years ago (undergrad in CS. The dot com boom
| called my name). In most large organization, different
| departments are separated into "cost centers". Managers
| are often responsible for their own profit and loss.
| Internal "costs" are assigned to departments working
| together.
|
| Why should the Disney+ manager get credit for making $450
| million in profit by causing Disney Movie Studios to lose
| $500 million? How is that good for the overall business?
| Again I'm completely making up numbers.
|
| We had a method to pay one bill and get all of the
| content you wanted - it was called "cable".
| geophile wrote:
| Same.
| ericmay wrote:
| Invasive advertising is a form of violence.
| Karsteski wrote:
| Words have meaning. I despise the insertion of ads in every
| form of media, but it is not violence. That's just silly.
| matheusmoreira wrote:
| Yes, they do. Especially words like "consent". Not even
| once did I consent to their brands being forcibly inserted
| into my mind. I feel extremely violated every single time
| some advertiser manages to get around my uBlock Origin.
|
| Advertising is mind rape.
| ericmay wrote:
| We have precedent for mental and emotional harm.
|
| I'd argue that invasive advertisements including but not
| limited to ads that make you remember catchy jingles,
| billboards on highways, ads that specifically target you
| based on profiling ("addictive") etc. are or can be
| emotional and mental harm. Ever hear the phrase "stuck in
| my head"? This happens with commercial jingles all the
| time. What if I don't want it to be stuck in my head but I
| happen to hear it? Seems akin to assault, especially if I'm
| not explicitly opting in to that behavior. It seems strange
| only because being blasted with advertisements 24/7 is
| normalized.
| yibg wrote:
| What you just wrote is violence, since it caused me to
| feel defensive and anxious and also think about it more
| than I'd like.
| ericmay wrote:
| You can easily draw lines between "I go to Hackernews.com
| to read the opinions of others and encountered an opinion
| I don't like" and "I have to listen to ESPN commercials
| at the gas pump and look at Jesus billboards when I'm
| driving down the highway". Other states have precedent
| for banning billboards actually.
|
| If you want to take the other extreme of your extreme
| example here, you should be ok with people driving down
| the street and blaring advertisements from trucks at full
| volume day and night.
| andsoitis wrote:
| If you truly believed that words can be violence, then
| logically you condone a physical response (eg hitting,
| shooting, etc.) to said verbal violence?
| markedle wrote:
| I see where you're coming from but I think it's more
| accurate to call them manipulative. Violence has a
| different connotation and we should keep them separate.
| Trying to force one thing into another is also
| manipulative.
| anthony_d wrote:
| None of that changes word meanings. Violence is physical:
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Violence
| themitigating wrote:
| If you asked most people, out of this context, if
| remembering an ad jingle or having one stuck if their
| head had a negative, positive, or neutral effect on them
| what would they say?
|
| I don't have any studies, but this is the first time I've
| heard anyone state this as a negative. Most people don't
| seem bothered or might even associate a good time with
| some jingle.
| Karsteski wrote:
| b0afc375b5 wrote:
| I don't know when or how it happened, but seeing or hearing
| even a single ad infuriates me.
|
| The best explanation I can come up with is that it wastes my
| time, and I value time above all else.
|
| I have never bought or purchased anything advertised online.
| And nowadays I consciously try to avoid products that I see on
| online ads.
| LionTamer wrote:
| > The best explanation I can come up with is that it wastes
| my time, and I value time above all else.
|
| Yes.
| jbirer wrote:
| The gaslighting by companies is pretty sickening. There's
| nothing acceptable about ads on a device that I did not ask
| for.
| thiht wrote:
| Especially when it comes in an update months after you bought
| your device. Looking at you Android TV.
| antx wrote:
| Another case in point: my TCL series 5 has made 11K (!!!) DNS
| requests for scribe.logs.roku.com, just last month.
|
| As a matter of fact, it's now the top-blocked domain in my pi-
| hole.
|
| It's a shame Roku won't allow you to at least opt-out of
| telemetry.
| PenguinCoder wrote:
| 11k blocked requests for that domain in a month? Seems low...
| My pi-hole is blocking that domain about 50k times A DAY. All
| from one TCL TV.
| aheckler wrote:
| I also have a TCL Roku TV and NextDNS. In the last 30 days,
| just over 16k connections to scribe.logs.roku.com have been
| blocked.
|
| Maybe your TV is a little overactive for some reason? 50k in
| a day almost makes it seem like something is broken somehow.
| [deleted]
| julianlam wrote:
| My current main television is a Sony Bravia I got right before
| the explosion of smart TVs. For all that it is "limited", it does
| all of those things very well.
|
| I get much more functionality by plugging in a computer than I do
| by using any smart TV.
| sergiotapia wrote:
| If you have children you have a moral imperative to pirate
| content and prevent this from infecting their lives.
|
| Search for a plexshare. $20 for everything, zero ads. Screw these
| greedy bastards.
| toastal wrote:
| Same reason why Facebook still pervades here in Thailand.
| Facebook offers 'free' internet access to their site. The have
| discounted 'social' bundles for data plans (providers
| necessarily have to snoop your traffic to see what you're
| using). People grow up with it as the 'normal'. Teaching kids
| that data collection is just a part of the internet _does_ have
| moral implications--just like we should stop training kids on
| Microsoft and Adobe software or letting Google 's Chromebooks
| invade the education space.
| scarface74 wrote:
| You're right, it's a moral imperative to show children that if
| you can't legally get what you want just do it illegally...
| Markoff wrote:
| downloading video content copy for personal consumption
| without owning original is legal in many European countries,
| uploading/distributing would be very different matter, let
| alone software
| scarface74 wrote:
| Most pirating is done via torrent. If you're downloading
| content, you are also uploading it.
|
| But no it isn't legal to download content that wasn't
| authorized to be uploaded.
| tpreetham wrote:
| Incorrect. You can turn seeding off. (Although that is
| not a very neighbourly thing to do) Also torrents are
| just one source.
| scarface74 wrote:
| Even when you're not "seeding" completed downloads, the
| segments you have are available to other downloads. Many
| clients also have the ability to downgrade an downloaders
| ability to get segments if you are not reciprocating.
| Mindwipe wrote:
| > downloading video content copy for personal consumption
| without owning original is legal in many European countries
|
| No it isn't.
| tenebrisalietum wrote:
| Legal != moral.
| scarface74 wrote:
| So yes it's your "moral right" to obtain content without
| paying for it because you don't want ads.
|
| Would you feel the same way if a commercial entity violated
| the GPL?
| tenebrisalietum wrote:
| Is it a "moral right" for companies to use intellectual
| property laws to force your children to watch ads?
| Children are legally unable to participate in contracts,
| should they be allowed to watch any media, with binding
| licenses and laws, at all?
| scarface74 wrote:
| Then either _buy_ media without ads or limit the amount
| of time and content your children spend watching ads?
| tenebrisalietum wrote:
| The media producing individual/group/company could do
| something else with their time/capital that isn't so
| casually pirateable, such as building housing or
| producing actual goods/services, instead of the "produce
| once then sit on your ass and collect royalties forever
| for the next century and a half" behavior that media
| production encourages.
| scarface74 wrote:
| Are you spending _your_ time building houses? Are you
| willing to quit your job and work for Habitat for
| Humanity?
| tenebrisalietum wrote:
| Yes, I would download a car.
| scarface74 wrote:
| Do you admit it is easy to tsk tsk and say how other
| people should work. But you won't make the same
| sacrifice?
| AlexandrB wrote:
| I thought this was the motto of startups. "Move fast and
| break things." etc.
| gargs wrote:
| Unless you use your television solely to experience encryption-
| free OTA programming, any cable provider or streaming app has the
| capability to sell your viewership data to third parties.
| SergeAx wrote:
| I bought a smart LG TV about a month ago. This is my first smart
| TV, and I was very cautious about it because of "too smart TV"
| stories. It is OLED and the picture worth every euro I paid for
| it (and it was quite a few euro, to be honest). I am downloading
| HDR 4k movies and playing them from USB stick. I also watching
| YouTube occasionally, casting it from the phone (TV plays it by
| itself, not receiving a stream from phone, which is great for
| quality).
|
| I didn't see any ads yet (including YouTube, because of Premium).
| What am I doing wrong?
| vz8 wrote:
| Call me crazy, but I think it's only a matter of time before
| windows in our living spaces will be monitors with overlaid ads.
| The in-app purchase will be "allowing us" to remove the ads so we
| can look at the view in peace.
|
| In the meantime, all my TVs never see the light of WiFi and have
| ROKU sticks.
| api wrote:
| One thing I fundamentally don't get: all this endless shoehorning
| of ads into everything is dependent on there being a seemingly
| unlimited amount of ad revenue on the table.
|
| Why? Do ads actually work this well if everyone hates them? What
| about ads shoehorned into marginal spaces and presented in ways
| that are barely relevant to the material?
|
| The only ads I EVER click on are relevant ads that come up from a
| search in which I am looking for something potentially to buy. In
| media and platforms (software, OSes) I usually associate the
| presence of ads with low-end crap.
|
| Am I weird? Are there tons of mindless ad clickers out there who
| actually buy based on irrelevant ad spam?
|
| Why are companies so stingy with wages and willing to outsource
| their core competencies in exchange for small gains but at the
| same time are willing to piss endless amounts of money away on
| ads?
| AlexandrB wrote:
| > Why are companies so stingy with wages and willing to
| outsource their core competencies in exchange for small gains
| but at the same time are willing to piss endless amounts of
| money away on ads?
|
| Because there's a whole analytics industry that tries to
| demonstrate ROI for each ad purchased. And as long at that ROI
| is positive it seems like a no-brainer to throw more money at
| advertising.
|
| I wonder how much of said analytics industry is bullshit.
| Especially since these analytics are often provided by the same
| companies that are selling you the ad space.
| api wrote:
| I wonder if a good chunk of the whole industry isn't a giant
| grift against advertisers.
|
| Problem is they have to invade our privacy and ruin our
| products and media to keep the grift going since the ads have
| to actually be shown somewhere, even if they're ineffective
| spam.
| vonseel wrote:
| I don't remember ever clicking through an ad on Youtube or
| similar, so I also have to wonder if ads really work so well. I
| guess I'm not the average ad-viewer since I doubt I've ever
| purchased anything that I didn't already need or want because I
| saw an ad.
| buro9 wrote:
| Not mentioned: Samba(dot)TV... who are probably _THE_ single most
| aggressive surveillance company operating in the Smart TV space.
|
| https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/05/business/media/tv-viewer-...
|
| And the Pi-Hole list you want is here:
| https://github.com/Perflyst/PiHoleBlocklist
| Traubenfuchs wrote:
| https://archive.ph/Lhr81
| snarfy wrote:
| archive.ph sends tracking to https://top-fwz1.mail.ru
|
| no thanks
| Traubenfuchs wrote:
| If it would remove all paywalls and nag popups I would
| personally send my browsing history to everyone who wants
| to see once per month.
| whimsicalism wrote:
| My guess is that American companies won't provide analytics
| to a website like archive.ph
| smileybarry wrote:
| AFAIK it's at least still opt-in (different checkbox on-setup
| and all), and you can outright disable the APK on
| Android/Google TV.
| vonseel wrote:
| I interviewed with them years ago. The technological challenges
| seemed cool but ethically I wouldn't want to work on tracking
| what people are watching.
| rubyfan wrote:
| I have a Samsung smart TV but have never agreed to the EULA or
| connected it to the internet. Not sure if this is good enough but
| I never see ads or really anything unexpected, just good old
| fashioned TV. I do worry though that some other EULA I've agreed
| to might give them the ability to connect the TV through
| SmartThings or something similar without my permission. Doesn't
| this seem crazy to even have to consider?
| aintthatthedeal wrote:
| theshrike79 wrote:
| Step 1: Get an LG WebOS Tv Step 2: Don't connect it to the
| internet Step 3: Use a separate device for any smart features,
| Apple TV, Google TV, nVidia Shield Step 4: No profit for ad
| sellers.
| wizofaus wrote:
| So my genuine question - asking if this post (an advertisement
| for AdGuard) is within HN rules - got flagged. I've since checked
| the guidelines and while it doesn't explicitly say product
| placement posts are verboten, they do seem against the spirit of
| the site ("Please don't use HN primarily for promotion"). But
| what guideline makes my comment flaggable?
| dang wrote:
| Users flagged it as well as
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32554218. We can only
| guess why users flag things, but in this case I think they
| probably just thought the comment was off topic, and not in an
| interesting way.
|
| The key for whether an article is good for HN is not its
| "adiness" (if I can put it that way) but its interestingness -
| i.e. does it gratify intellectual curiosity. In this case
| plenty of users clearly thought it did. It may be true that an
| article was written as part of a startup's effort to promote
| its product, but that's not necessarily a bad thing, as long as
| the content itself is interesting. (Of course, it tends not to
| be, because content marketing tends to be boring, but that's a
| different issue.)
|
| The rule in https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
| about not using HN primarily for promotion is about how people
| post to HN. In the case of
| https://news.ycombinator.com/posts?id=PretzelFisch it seems
| clear that the user isn't posting to HN primarily to promote
| anything, and certainly not this particular product.
|
| Still, I'm glad you noticed that rule! It's a relatively recent
| one and I think it added a lot.
| whichdan wrote:
| I have an LG C1, which is an amazing TV, but even after disabling
| every single ad-related option, I'll still occasionally get a
| pop-up ad when the TV turns on.
| LoyCgg wrote:
| I am planning to migrate from smart tv to just panel + some
| android tv box. Any suggestions for the box? Needs to be android
| for some local tv apps to work.
| brightball wrote:
| This type of expectation is why I've always gravitated towards
| Roku sticks.
|
| They're cheap, really well designed, centrally controlled on your
| account and you avoid any need to over-invest in specific TV
| vendors to have the same experience across the board.
|
| And it can't do anything that the HDMI port can't do.
| Shady69 wrote:
| I get what your saying but the article specifically mentions
| Roku partnering with Walmart to not only show ads but even
| facilitate the purchase...
|
| My solution has been a Raspberry Pi running Kodi.
| brightball wrote:
| There's a part of me that wonders if this wasn't by
| necessity.
|
| I went into Best Buy just before Christmas and they had
| Google TVs and Amazon TVs everywhere, prominently displayed
| and fully stocked. They only had 2-3 little Roku TV's hidden
| in the back corner that I had to ask somebody to even find.
|
| If I go into Sam's Club or Walmart, I can find Roku
| everywhere with great options.
|
| It made me wonder if the other vendors were trying to push
| Roku out and because of that they were forced into a deal
| with Walmart to remain viable.
| ValentineC wrote:
| > _This type of expectation is why I 've always gravitated
| towards Roku sticks._
|
| I like Roku's interface and price, but it's a shame that
| they're nigh-useless outside the US.
| pnut wrote:
| I can do youtube, Netflix, and Amazon prime with mine, plus
| BBC and ITV etc here in the UK.
|
| What else can they do that I'm missing out on?
| ValentineC wrote:
| Whoops I think my statement above wasn't specific enough.
| Roku promises official support in 18 countries across
| America and Europe [1], but I'm in Asia.
|
| [1] https://www.roku.com/intl
| scarface74 wrote:
| You have gravitated toward Roku even though the CEO outright
| admitted in a podcast interview (referenced in the article)
| that Roku is an advertising company not a hardware company?
|
| You see those four hard coded buttons on your Roku remote that
| are shortcuts to streaming services? They went to the highest
| bidder. You see that non removable banner ad on the right side
| of your Home Screen? You see the advertisement for the Game of
| Thrones prequel right in your menu?
|
| Roku is the worse offender. Yes we have multiple Roku TVs and I
| recommend them to almost anyone because they are cheap, Roku
| has the best SmartTV operating system, support for every
| streaming service comes to it first, and it has a long history
| of updating its software. But, the two TVs I use most
| frequently also have AppleTV 4Ks attached.
|
| I also take a Roku stick when I'm traveling because it works
| with captive networks that require a login. With the AppleTV I
| would have to configure a travel router.
| vonseel wrote:
| Copying from another comment, in case you didn't see:
|
| With tvOS 15.4, "Captive Wi-Fi network support on tvOS allows
| you to use your iPhone or iPad to connect your Apple TV to
| networks that need additional sign-in steps, like at hotels
| or dorms."
|
| https://developer.apple.com/documentation/tvos-release-
| notes...
| anonymousab wrote:
| They can show you ads over anything they're displaying from an
| HDMI port.
| brightball wrote:
| But they can't access built in hardware on the TV to listen
| in.
| Snitch-Thursday wrote:
| yeah. I've made the 'not going to do nothing but also not going
| to dedicate my life to self-hosting everything' choice: I
| bought a dumb spectre generic tv, then hooked up a roku stick,
| and am letting the pihole catch whatever it can, and hoping for
| the best from there.
|
| So far, the banner ads in roku stay away, so it probably works
| well enough?
| DethNinja wrote:
| There is a much better option for HN crowd:
|
| Buy a large/modern computer monitor and connect it to your
| homelab's media server.
|
| Literally there is no need for a smart TV so long as you are
| capable of setting up a small homelab.
| jayd16 wrote:
| Who's making 65" 4k OLED monitors?
| zoba wrote:
| You can find these by searching "conference room monitor"
| designium wrote:
| Depending on the size and brand, it's price is similar to
| "smart TVs". The bigger ones are costlier.
| [deleted]
| wongarsu wrote:
| Of course, after all smart TVs have an ongoing revenue
| stream from ads and analytics. Despite having more
| capabilities, Smart TVs are also regularly cheaper than
| equivalent "dumb TVs".
| reaperducer wrote:
| _Smart TVs are also regularly cheaper than equivalent
| "dumb TVs"._
|
| Only if you don't value quality.
|
| A did a price comparison about a year ago, using Best Buy
| and B&H. The plain display panels from B&H were either
| the same, or only marginally more expensive than the
| equivalent "smart" televisions from Best Buy.
|
| People on HN too often parrot that Vizeo CEO's claim that
| his TVs are only cheap because of all the spying they do.
| While true, it only holds up in you're interested in
| watching a Vizeo-quality TV.
| Gigachad wrote:
| I'd honestly rather watch adverts than have to run a home
| server again.
| bilekas wrote:
| Controversial .. Would you care to expand on that ? I don't
| know anyone who would prefer to see adverts compared to
| plugging in a NAS / DLNA ?
|
| These days there is nothing more than plug and play..
| jayd16 wrote:
| Its not about what it takes to do it yourself, its about
| the upkeep required to keep the family happily using it.
| sumtechguy wrote:
| I can comment on that. But I _get_ the sentiment. For my
| setup there always seems to be some small thing that is
| wrong all the time. Fix - fine for a few months... borked.
| When you just want to watch something. I currently have to
| go thru the system and figure out why it is not acting like
| an appliance. Start up is constantly an issue with my
| setup. So when anyone in the house wants to watch something
| they are coming to find me. Current suspect is the hdmi vs
| the tv I have is not setting up the connection correctly.
| For the amount of media I own it is not feasible to go back
| to the old system though so I stay. Also adverts suck. But
| I totally understand the sentiment.
| Gigachad wrote:
| I ran a home server last year with jellyfin, nextcloud,
| torrent server, etc. I ended up spending more time and
| money on the server than watching and paying for the actual
| content. And then the thing was always broken in some way.
| bilekas wrote:
| I see, I guess I have been lucky in that regard.. I have
| my NAS plugged in, libtorrent with autoirssi and just a
| plex server running for the actual streaming though.
| emeril wrote:
| haha - I rec just getting the cheapest option at ultra.cc
| ($5-6/month) and load whatever apps you want on it (e.g.,
| rutorrent/sabnzbd) connecting that to your media
| player/app/stick of choice (e.g., firestick with kodi) -
| haven't tried it with super high bitrate content but seems
| pretty quick
| wccrawford wrote:
| I'm the opposite of that. I will go to pretty great lengths
| to avoid ads. They are incredibly annoying and often actively
| stupid. I am _so_ much happier now that I almost never see a
| TV ad.
|
| FWIW, mobile ads are worse. Avoiding them is easier, though.
| I almost always tell it when to show the ad and I can just
| look away with it muted for a while and do something else.
| I'm usually already watching TV while I play ad-based games
| anyhow. But if I had to actually watch the ads, I'd just stop
| playing those games.
| unethical_ban wrote:
| A home served setup can be as simple as a Shield Pro with a
| hard drive attached. It's a lot simpler than 2009 for me,
| when I was running FreeBSD desktop with nvidia drivers
| painfully installed and a wireless keyboard.
| ape4 wrote:
| What about over-the-air TV
| JohnFen wrote:
| Not an option everywhere. Where I am, the digital switchover
| meant that most TV stations can no longer be received over
| the air.
| wombat-man wrote:
| Just need a tuner? Although I haven't used one in a while. I
| use a smart TV that isn't connected to internet.
| scarface74 wrote:
| Where can I get a 65 inch computer monitor?
|
| I've done the homelab media server. I did my first one back in
| 2006 with a Mac Mini running Front Row. But this is 2022. If
| you want a set top box without tracking, just buy an AppleTV.
| It cost more because Apple makes money off of hardware and not
| advertising.
|
| Yes I know the reports about Apple getting even deeper into
| advertising. Yes it saddens me.
| wongarsu wrote:
| Digital Signage Displays are basically fancy monitors
| available as large as you want. But they'll cost you a pretty
| penny, being designed for 24/7 operation and without the ad-
| subsidy of smart TVs. Maybe hunt for a used one. Or
| conference room monitors, as suggested elsewhere in the
| thread.
| bluGill wrote:
| Digital signage displays target a market that includes
| safety information in factories. if the TV there shows an
| ad instead of the safety content people may die.
| noisy_boy wrote:
| https://www.dell.com/en-us/shop/dell-75-4k-interactive-
| touch...
|
| Not cheap though.
| jayd16 wrote:
| Touch screen? Probably looks like crap considering picture
| quality is not the primary concern.
| LinuxBender wrote:
| Being an interactive touch monitor is likely part of the
| cost.
| blueflow wrote:
| Not having an TV is also a viable option. Around 2016 my last
| TV broke down and i have adapted to live without it.
|
| When i say 'TV' i also mean to include Netflix and Hulu and
| other services serving the same purpose.
| scarface74 wrote:
| So, yes the alternative is not to use a device used by 95%
| homes in the US.
|
| What next the old Slashdot meme - "I haven't owned a TV in 10
| years. Do people still watch TV?"
| JohnFen wrote:
| Why does it matter what devices most homes have?
| blueflow wrote:
| This is a non-argument - just because most people do it
| doesn't mean you have to do it, too.
|
| Edit: The slippery slope: 95% of people are straight.
| scient wrote:
| blueflow wrote:
| > other people shouldn't watch it either.
|
| Where did i suggest that? I only showed that what i did
| is a possible path. At no point i judged the other paths.
|
| Watch my phrasing.. "... is an option", "you don't have
| to ...".
|
| I suspect you are reading too much between my lines.
| scarface74 wrote:
| Yes because without such great insight, everyone would
| have thought that TV was a necessity in life like food
| water and shelter...
| blueflow wrote:
| Worse, they think they need an TV because its "used by
| 95% homes in the US".
| scarface74 wrote:
| Would you say it's good advice if someone needs to know
| how to change a tire - "I haven't owned a car in 10
| years. Just don't buy a car?"
| blueflow wrote:
| Its only unreasonable if you need the car for something.
| By implication, i assume having a TV is a necessity for
| you.
|
| If you want a TV in your life so badly, you can say just
| that. Like "But i love Star{gate,trek,wars} and i can't
| watch it comfortably without a TV/Streaming". The thing
| with the 95% is a unecessary pretense.
| scarface74 wrote:
| Your edit doesn't help. That's just like giving advice to
| a straight man who complains about not being able to find
| a woman - "just find a man. I haven't slept with a woman
| in 10 years. You don't have to date women."
| mrweasel wrote:
| While I do see, and agree with your point, we're also at a
| time where it's honestly much much easier to not own a TV
| than say 20 years ago.
| scarface74 wrote:
| He said that he means no video content from anywhere -
| including streaming services.
| mrweasel wrote:
| Yes, I understand that. Going back to the 80' or 90'
| you'd frequently be in a position where everyone had seen
| the same news, show or movie the night before or during
| the weekend, leaving you out of the conversation. That's
| no longer the case, there is so much content that it's
| not really weird that haven't watch something. Sports is
| so expensive that it's no surprise that you didn't a
| particular event. It's almost surprising of two people in
| an office watched the same thing the night before.
|
| Also there are so many other types of media available,
| like video games, audio-books, podcasts, online articles,
| e-books. You can be just as informed and entertained
| without a TV.
| zubiaur wrote:
| We are doing that. We have a projector. In its case under the
| table in the living room.
|
| Setting it up increases the transaction cost of watching a
| show/movie. The result is that we only put it up for the few
| cases when we deem it worth it.
|
| And when we do, the experience is awesome.
| scythe wrote:
| I had this idea as an undergraduate. Unfortunately, I
| didn't consider the geometry and realized too late that a
| good viewing experience with a projector requires a screen,
| which I didn't have room (or money) for. As penance I
| watched most of _Inuyasha_ on a popcorn wall.
| bjoli wrote:
| I haven't had one since 2006. I haven't missed it, nor do I
| watch any streaming services apart from the occasional
| documentary that generally leaves me disappointed.
| blueflow wrote:
| I agree that the quality is disappointingly bad, and this
| was the main driver behind my decision to not buy an
| replacement.
| vonseel wrote:
| Maybe you're just not TV people. That's OK. But plenty of
| people on the other side would say the Golden Age of TV
| is still ongoing. There are more shows and productions
| being made than ever, maybe that's led to an abundance of
| mediocre content, but there have been many great shows
| made in the last 10 years.
|
| Try Kingdom on Peacock.
| tsvetkov wrote:
| The existing options for monitors, suitable for use as a TV,
| are extremely limited. For TVs 55" and 65" are common, for
| monitors there were just a few, which were dumb TVs basically.
| And then there are bigger sizes, different types of panels
| (there are no 4K QD-OLED monitors for example) that are not
| available for monitors. I think, if telemetry and ads are
| concern, buying TV without connecting it to the internet (using
| Apple TV or a homelab media server) is a better choice for many
| TV buyers.
| dwighttk wrote:
| Eh, I'd rather get that ad subsidy and never connect the tv to
| the internet
| dudul wrote:
| Sure, until we reach the point of "always connected" TVs that
| will work.
| teddyh wrote:
| TVs will soon, if not already, come with cell phones; the ad
| revenue is larger than what they are charged for the cell
| phone IP traffic. TVs also reportedly use any open WiFi they
| can see, and use DoH to make DNS-based ad blocking
| impossible.
| littlecranky67 wrote:
| The "they use any open wifi they can see" myth has been
| brought up on HN multiple times, and never did anybody
| provide any credible proof of this rumour (that started as
| a single reddit comment).
| rovr138 wrote:
| How about one that can do 5G? Samsung and Huawei are
| doing 5G TV,
|
| https://www.techradar.com/news/samsungs-5g-8k-tv-
| promises-to...
|
| https://www.techradar.com/news/huawei-is-
| developing-a-5g-8k-...
| resfirestar wrote:
| Worth noting that these articles are from 2019 and there
| hasn't been much talk of 5G TVs since. Aside from plain
| old 5G hype, SK Telecom wants 5G TVs as part of their
| envisioned ATSC/5G convergence that would bring more OTT
| services to broadcast TV (using their 5G network,
| naturally). This is mostly for the Korean market, since
| in North America broadcast TV is less popular and 5G
| networks have less capacity.
| teddyh wrote:
| I would be surprised if modern TVs didn't connect to open
| WiFis; there is literally no reason for TVs not to do
| this, and every incentive to do it. Even if we discount
| the ads as a motivator, it's still a simple solution to
| get people's stuff configured automatically.
| Datagenerator wrote:
| Would be surprised if they don't include 5G in order to
| gain permanent unfiltered access. Sending that sweet
| telemetry data has priority.
| BeefWellington wrote:
| It would be pretty easy to check and validate if that's
| true.
| littlecranky67 wrote:
| Legal issues aside, there might be loss of company image
| and also privacy related matter (I can run an open wifi
| to see the data that my neighbour TV sends).
|
| And to add to this: There has been no proof ever that
| modern TVs do this, and it would be quite easy for
| anyone/journalists/reviewers to check this (just run an
| open wifi and monitor it).
| vlunkr wrote:
| In my sample size of two different brands, this isn't
| true.
| netsharc wrote:
| And I would be surprised if they did... the belief in
| these sorts of tech urban legends/conspiracy theories
| that some seemingly techie people have is cringeworthy.
|
| And no, Facebook/Instagram aren't listening to users
| either, it would need too much bandwidth/server power to
| process all those conversations, and if you say "they can
| do the speech recognition on the users' phones", the
| majority of users use budget phones that don't have that
| sort of power.
| teddyh wrote:
| This reminds me of the pre-Snowden times, where people
| often assumed that governments widely recorded internet
| traffic, since they had both the capability and the
| motivation, but people like you dismissed it as "urban
| legends/conspiracy theories" because there wasn't any
| hard evidence.
| netsharc wrote:
| How do you know what I did in regards to the Five Eyes?
|
| I wonder what's easier to check and verify, a secret
| government tapping of the Internet, or if the TVs in
| millions of people's living rooms are trying to connect
| to open WiFi networks...
| teddyh wrote:
| (I did not mention or claim anything about you
| personally.)
|
| You're right in that this should be easier to find. But I
| haven't seen any concerted effort to buy _N_ number of
| smart TVs and do security analysis on them in order to
| find something like this.
| smileybarry wrote:
| Until someone makes a honeypot library that just spams
| Google Cast/AirPlay 2 streams when it sees a random TV
| join
| rovr138 wrote:
| Already,
|
| https://www.techradar.com/news/samsungs-5g-8k-tv-promises-
| to...
|
| https://www.techradar.com/news/huawei-is-
| developing-a-5g-8k-...
| a4isms wrote:
| For now, this appears to be feasible.
|
| And it will probably stay feasible as long as the number of
| people who do it is relatively miniscule. But economics being
| economics, we're freeloading off the customers who hook their
| smart TVs up to the internet and provide manufacturers with
| enough revenue that they don't care about us.
|
| But should the practice become widespread and manufacturers
| notice a material impact on their revenues, or should growth
| stall and manufacturers start looking to squeeze more revenue
| out of customers, they will start embedding SIM cards in TVs
| that can't be disabled, and work out deals with wireless
| carriers to have a private data channel as Amazon does with
| its kindles.
|
| my 4K "smart" TV is the first I ever bought, and I believe
| the last. By the time I will want to replace it, I believe
| manufacturers will have closed this "loophole" and it will be
| impossible to keep a new TV from phoning home.
| reaperducer wrote:
| _they will start embedding SIM cards in TVs that can't be
| disabled_
|
| The real reason we "need" 5G, instead of better 4G, isn't
| so our cars can suddenly drive themselves and every
| hospital with be magically populated with surgery robots.
| It's so that every item we ever buy can spy on us.
| ospzfmbbzr wrote:
| If I try to reverse engineer the requirements for IPv6
| and 5G it really seems like they are just key pillars of
| a world surveillance apparatus. Certainly IPv6 is
| completely unnecessary for most cases -- but if you
| criticize it you will get the hysterical tell tale vax or
| 'climate' treatment -- you are a bad person for stealing
| the last IPv4 from children or something!
| littlecranky67 wrote:
| > they will start embedding SIM cards in TVs that can't be
| disabled
|
| Open up the TV and solder the antenna to ground. If the TVs
| refuse to work when there is no Signal, good luck with
| customer complaints - here in Germany, we have huge black-
| spots with no reception whatsoever (mostly rural areas, but
| people still live in those).
| _aavaa_ wrote:
| If the % of people who don't connect their smart TV to
| internet is small, then the % of people who will go
| through the trouble of soldering their TV (and voiding
| their warranty) is essentially 0%.
| littlecranky67 wrote:
| The whole "void warranty if any changes are made" is
| mostly not enforcable in Europe and as I understand it in
| some part in the US. In Germany, you would just have to
| proof that your change is not the culprit of the damage.
| I.e. if your OLED panel breaks, you can still claim
| warranty.
| _aavaa_ wrote:
| I believe that proof is going to be more difficult if
| you're soldering stuff on the inside of the device.
| MerelyMortal wrote:
| All of the US.
|
| Magnuson-Moss Waranty Act. It's the same law that allows
| you to use aftermarket parts without voiding your car
| warranty.
|
| In the U.S., "Warrantly Void If Removed" stickers are
| lying, and potentially illegal.
| vlunkr wrote:
| > they will start embedding SIM cards in TVs that can't be
| disabled
|
| There's no need to start jumping at shadows here.
| a4isms wrote:
| Samsung and other manufacturers have already announced
| 5G-enabled Smart TVs. You're right there's no need to
| jump at shadows, but if this looks like a shadow, well...
|
| https://www.techradar.com/news/samsungs-5g-8k-tv-
| promises-to...
| a4isms wrote:
| Key quote:
|
| _The news of Samsung 's upcoming TV will likely be a
| blow to Huawei, which is reportedly working on its own 5G
| 8K TV. Sharp is also working on its own 8K+5G initiative
| - both companies will need to hurry up if they want to
| beat Samsung to the punch, though._
|
| 5G TVs may not be in our homes yet, but they're on our
| doorstep.
|
| And this comment is late to the conversation, but with 5G
| TVs, all of your streaming will go over 5G. No
| opportunity to use tooling to block ads or inspect what
| is being "phoned home." There are a good number of people
| whose primary uses for home internet are streaming and
| web browsing.
|
| If these same TVs have a "WiFi hotspot app" that turns on
| a hotspot for an extra subscription, the TV manufacturers
| and their telecom partners will execute an end-around on
| the wired connectivity business.
|
| Competition is good, but not when it's offering cheap
| internet in exchange for stripping consumers of any
| control whatsoever over their privacy.
| jacquesm wrote:
| Sorry, but that's not 'jumping at shadows' but pretty
| much a given.
| smileybarry wrote:
| Some vendors are also just less scummy in turning it off and
| the extent of ad services. Sony TVs are Google TV-based and
| explicitly ask for Samba (not SMB) TV analytics (and can be
| declined), and you can just outright disable the APK in
| settings. No ads in menus like Samsung (you do get the Google
| TV "recommendations" but that's a whole other problem).
| amelius wrote:
| I recently got a small tuner box from my cable company. It
| requires both an ethernet connection and an ethernet-enabled
| HDMI cable ...
|
| The nice part is that I can control the tuner with the same
| remote as the TV.
|
| The not so nice part: my TV is now connected to the internet.
| dsr_ wrote:
| Bought a cheap HiSense TV for my kid to use as a big monitor.
|
| It literally will not work for any input source -- including
| OTA TV -- until it has been hooked to a network where it can
| register itself.
|
| It appears to work afterwards without a network connection...
| but I cannot recommend HiSense at all.
| jacquesm wrote:
| Return it as defective. If enough people do that they'll
| get the message. An internet connection should not be a
| requirement for buying an appliance.
| kennend3 wrote:
| This!
|
| you see post after post of people complaining about
| things but doing little about it.
|
| Returning products as "defective" is pretty hard on
| manufacturers as stores do not like this happening.
| jacquesm wrote:
| The asymmetry between the costs for the returns process
| and the 'happy path' of sales is such that even a
| relatively small percentage would throw a giant spanner
| in the works. You need to sell three more to make up for
| one return or so.
| theandrewbailey wrote:
| Just don't use a smart monitor. Yeah, those will spy on you,
| too.
|
| https://news.samsung.com/global/samsung-electronics-announce...
| nicbou wrote:
| Frankly at this point I'd just avoid buying anything from
| Samsung. If there's one company that's displayed consistent
| disregard for data privacy, it's them.
| moepstar wrote:
| Add Sony to that list as well - and not just disregard for
| privacy, even total disrespect to their buyers,
| repeatedly..
| [deleted]
| asiachick wrote:
| I hate this too. I got a top end Sony TV and it was covered in
| ads. I left it in Basic mode but it's still covered in an ugly ad
| to please sign up for Google TV
|
| Then I finally got a PS5 two days ago. It's also covered in ads
| with no way to turn them off. I might sell it as I don't want to
| support such crap and there is nothing I absolutely need to play.
|
| The thing I find most infruiating is that someone else gets to
| decide what I see every time I use either of them (well the tv
| works in basic mode tho it's an eye sore)
|
| Often what's being shown to me is something I find offensive or
| hate. I hate sports for example. Or it's a TV show I can't stand
| or a movie with an actor that rubs reminds me of a bad
| relationship .
|
| I get there are lots of situations in life where other choose
| what I see but for some reason my TV's default when turning it on
| is one too many
| candiddevmike wrote:
| Downfall implies a failure or ending, it seems like they're still
| selling like hotcakes. This is why we need regulation to save us
| from surveillance, most consumers want cheap and don't
| understand/care that they're selling their privacy instead.
| ClumsyPilot wrote:
| some manufacturers are outright scamming people - philips has
| added advertisement to TVs after they were sold!
| happymellon wrote:
| I thought that was Samsung. Of course it wouldn't surprise me
| if it was both.
| 2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote:
| Same with my Nvidia Shield TV which is aggravating.
| wccrawford wrote:
| At least with the Shield, nVidia wasn't the one that added
| those ads. It was Google. nVidia was put in a bad situation
| there, and I'm hoping they'll correct it soon.
| kesslern wrote:
| Sony did too. I tried to bypass it by getting a relatively
| expensive nVidia Shield. It got home screen ads about a year
| later.
| helloooooooo wrote:
| They're selling like hotcakes because you cannot find non-smart
| TVs anymore
| Kiro wrote:
| Even if you could smart TVs would outsell dumb TVs by a great
| margin.
| asdff wrote:
| I don't know if that is true. Everyone I know with a smart
| TV uses some other device hooked into it (roku, apple tv,
| video games) to run the actual streaming apps because the
| TV hardware is so poor. If they could buy a TV that's just
| a TV and pay a little less to not have those features they
| aren't ever using, they'd probably do it. Most people just
| care abut whether a TV is a certain size and only gamers
| really care about 4k. If you cared about 4k for movies you
| wouldn't waste that resolution on compressed streaming
| content; you'd probably have a small blu ray collection.
| Kiro wrote:
| Aside from a few Apple TVs I don't know many people who
| do that, especially not Roku which I presume is some
| American thing, but I know a lot of people who use the
| apps on their Smart TV. The rest are hooking up the TV to
| their computer. I also know a lot of people (me included)
| who wants a 4K TV just to watch Netflix in 4K so I don't
| think that's generally true. Don't know anyone who uses
| Blu-ray.
| gertrunde wrote:
| They do exist if you look for them:
|
| e.g. https://www.sharpconsumer.uk/electronics/tv/non-smart-
| tv-hd-...
|
| (Edit: size and resolution admittedly not great)
| api wrote:
| It's called a large computer monitor or projector, but you
| have to pay a lot more because it's not being subsidized by
| ads or surveillance.
| littlecranky67 wrote:
| Any TV sold in the EU must adhere to the GDPR, so there has to
| be some sort of opt-out for tracking (and yes, GDPR opt-out
| also applies for "anonymized" profiling)
| nicbou wrote:
| No opt-out. It must be opt-in - off from the start.
|
| This does not stop companies from making it very difficult to
| stay opted out, or to disregard GDPR entirely. After all,
| enforcement is very rare.
| littlecranky67 wrote:
| Then it will be the classic "Do you want to opt-in?" popup
| with two options: "Yes" and "Ask later" with a lack of a No
| button. Just show this every time the TV is powered on, and
| getting "consent" is a matter of weeks at best.
| mschuster91 wrote:
| Intent matters, and EU DPOs and courts have already begun
| striking back against dark patterns [0] years ago.
|
| [1] https://www.datenschutzkanzlei.de/grenzen-des-
| nudging-lg-ros...
| littlecranky67 wrote:
| Tell it to Meta who used that pattern on Whatsapp to
| obtain consent to merge data with Facebook.
| mschuster91 wrote:
| Meta is governed by the Irish DPO which just about
| _everyone_ else thinks they 're intentionally stalling,
| Germany is pissed in particular [0].
|
| [0] https://www.handelsblatt.com/politik/deutschland/date
| nschutz...
| cassianoleal wrote:
| My LG TV has opt-in for tracking. That said, a lot of stuff
| just refuses to work unless I accept it. I refuse to use
| those features. It's a lose-lose situation.
| formercoder wrote:
| I quite like my android tv on my lg display. It's responsive
| with a nice solid feeling remote. I think there are ads on the
| screen but I've never given them more than a passing glance
| except once or twice I was recommended a good tv show. Most
| people outside of the HN crowd really don't think about this
| stuff at all.
| 2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote:
| > I've never given them more than a passing glance except
| once or twice I was recommended a good tv show.
|
| Looks like the ads worked.
| dhritzkiv wrote:
| To my knowledge, LG TVs don't run Android TV, but webOS
| instead.
| formercoder wrote:
| Sony*, sorry
| scarface74 wrote:
| 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.
| jdbernard wrote:
| 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.
| scarface74 wrote:
| How did that work out?
| MrPatan wrote:
| Your downvoters don't know that that's exactly what happens.
| I see cookie consent popups on the TV, every time. I have no
| idea where they are coming from.
| Lendal wrote:
| That's the beauty of great click bait. A word or idiom can mean
| different things now to people from different social nets.
| "Downfall" here could mean in terms of sales, or it could mean
| in industry reputation, or even more things even the author
| isn't aware of. Either way the headline has apparently tested
| well probably due to its controversial meaning.
| s1k3s wrote:
| I feel like these anti-consumer practices by BigCorp can open the
| door for new companies to emerge on the market: build an ad-free
| tv, ad-free smartphones etc. Or is it just the effect of me
| living in a bubble while 99.9% of the customers don't care about
| this?
| atty wrote:
| I think there are two reasons. First, most people might be
| mildly annoyed by the ads at most, and certainly wouldn't make
| a buying decision based on them. Second, it's almost impossible
| for new companies to compete on both quality and price at the
| same time, unless they're subsidizing the product somehow (ads,
| perhaps? :) or as an unsustainable VC funded business I guess).
| How often is it that we see a new company that can make a
| smartphone that has the fit and finish, camera quality, and
| specs of an equivalently priced iPhone/Samsung/Pixel phone?
| asdff wrote:
| Bigcorp has their hands in many cookie jars and don't care if
| they take a loss on selling the panel in the smart tv if it
| means they gain in licensing deals from having "Netflix"
| printed on the remote. You can come in, your offering will just
| be costlier than the subsidized smart tv and you will be driven
| out of business before long. Or, no suppliers even want to work
| for you because they are busy fulfilling orders from bigcorps
| who will gladly buy up all their capacity to keep people like
| you from having an easy time starting a small business.
| pbronez wrote:
| I guess this comes down to the balance between the marginal
| cost of offering an additional product line with a different
| firmware and the marginal revenue of winning the privacy first
| market.
|
| Then there's the constant problem with pay-to-avoid ads... the
| people who have the spare cash to pay are the ones the
| advertisers want most. Removing them from the target population
| lowers the overall value of the targetable group and reduces
| revenue for your ad-supported products.
| justaman wrote:
| Non-tech people I talk to hate ads too. Boomers have been
| talking about how facebook is all ads now too.
| scarface74 wrote:
| Yes because consumers have history of paying more for quality
| in aggregate...
|
| There is a reason that two of the five most valuable companies
| in the US are adTech - Google and Facebook.
|
| How many consumers are going to choose to pay $300 more for an
| ad free privacy first TV?
|
| How many consumers right now are willing to pay for an AppleTV
| over a $30 Roku stick?
| prasadjoglekar wrote:
| You need a surprisingly small number of HN crowd like folks
| to ruin the market. Most ad targeting - regardless of actual
| product - goes after people with high discretionary income.
| If a chunk of those folks self selected out of the video ad
| market, it ruins the overall economics.
|
| This is an idea I've toyed with - corner the >200K income TV
| market with privacy features. Make it as easy as Roku to
| block all this.
| scarface74 wrote:
| Hardware needs scale and distribution to be successful. The
| HN crowd can't keep geek ventures like the Firefox phone
| and various Linux phones afloat.
| wizofaus wrote:
| ilrwbwrkhv wrote:
| That's why Sony TVs have always been ahead of the competition and
| the only ones I ever buy.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2022-08-22 23:02 UTC)