we live in hell
I don’t even understand the pitch? you have the disc playing, in your hands, your ownership, no buffering, no subscription required. and they’re saying…hey do you want a worse experience?
we live in hell
I don’t even understand the pitch? you have the disc playing, in your hands, your ownership, no buffering, no subscription required. and they’re saying…hey do you want a worse experience?
Sometimes you have to be a bit more pragmatic. I’m not aware of any TV with HDR, Dolby Vision, OLED, etc. that isn’t smart and reasonably priced. Your best bet is to buy a smart TV and block Internet access.
Another thing you can do is visit the selfhosted subs and they can help you out with other things like pihole for blocking ads and intrusive network activity on your home network.
Getting pihole set up may just be my new year’s resolution.
Yep, most of them won’t complain if you just never connect them to Wi-Fi during setup.
There’s a pretty good chance they’ll get around it- if they aren’t already.
Samsung TV? You have a Samsung phone? There’s an easy way to jump the air gap.
Neighbor has a TV connected to the Internet? Send data to that TV and pretend you’re not connected to anything so the user doesn’t catch on.
Pretty sure that’s straight up against the law. IANAL tho.
Amazon already built it: https://www.amazon.com/Amazon-Sidewalk
Apple HomeKit does something similar with BLE devices - if your phone goes out of range, they’ll connect to the closest Apple TV or HomePod to get internet access
Page is localized, and is empty here. But hey, fuck Amazon anyways.
That’s exactly how air tags work currently.
No it’s not, AirTags are just Bluetooth beacons. When an iPhone or other apple device picks them up, the location data is uploaded to Apple’s servers and then sent to whoever owns the AirTag. There’s no two-way communication and the owner of the AirTag doesn’t get any personal info from the devices picking it up.
I’d like to see where in the EULA it states your TV and Internet connection are used for hauling your neighbor’s data.
I have never had any smart TV complain (yet) that I have never once connected wifi. I am guessing there would be lawsuits, that a physical device requiring internet and requiring you to connect it just to function, would get sued in a class action of some kind. I use other connection systems via HDMI to transcode media, and even people who still want TV do not need to connect the TV itself to wifi, since it should all come over through HDMI ideally (or DP or whatever cables it may be.)
You’re going to love this free tv then. It’s free, and people has began receiving this tv since the last 3 months or so. In exchange for receiving this free tv, you’ll have to make some sacrifice:
Breaking the ToS means your credit card would get charged $1000. Very fun TV.
This may not be a popular opinion, but I personally see no issue with this if the terms of service and use are made clear and transparent before you order the device. Would I personally recommend or use the product? Hell no, but people having an informed choice, and choosing to accept these terms is perfectly fine imo.
I agree with you. Instead of spending money to buy a smart tv and still getting ads and your data collected, I can see the appeal of paying $0 to get a smart tv riddled with ads and data collection. At least you’re not paying any money for the device. I just wish the opposite is also possible where you can buy a smart tv with zero ads and data collection.
I read 1984. It just took us a little longer to get there.
That all looks absolutely horrific, but clearly they have some customers somehow?
It does all those things because you explicitly agree to it before getting the TV. Not the same as paying outright for a TV that somehow needs a constant connection.
This is…dystopian…