Reposting this from here from 2023, after I stumbled across it tonight and it hits hard.

The text in the image:

I love my smart TV. I love the way it takes a long time to boot up because it’s trying to refresh the advertisements on the home screen. I delight in the way it randomly restarts because it’s downloaded an update without asking me, each of which makes the TV slower and slower with every subsequent install. I adore the way it buries the apps that I want to use, and that I use without fail every single time, below the apps that it’s being paid to promote and which I have never touched in my life and would never use without the cold metal of a glock pressed hard against my sweating temple. I am infinitely thrilled by the way the interface lags constantly, due to the need to have one thousand unnecessary animations rendered on hardware ripped wholesale from a ten year old phone. I feel myself borne aloft on wings of pure joy when I am notified that my data will be collected and analysed to determine my usage patterns. Even now I am writing this from a field of beautiful flowers and soft luscious grass as I lie and look up happily at the bright blue sky, smiling happily to know that this is the future of technology

    • 𝕸𝖔𝖘𝖘@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      1 day ago

      The smart ones are sold at cost or at a loss, and your privacy is then sold to subsidize the profits. A dumb tv costs more money up front (since it’s not subsidized by your privacy), but it costs far less in overall value. It’s a tradeoff that the consumer needs to make. The lovely thing, is that (for now, at least) it is still a choice we can make.

        • 𝕸𝖔𝖘𝖘@infosec.pub
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          24 hours ago

          Not all tvs allow you to do that. Some require you to be online. Some took it a step further and are equipped with 4/5G modems to bypass your network restrictions.

          • oatscoop@midwest.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            15 hours ago

            A set of torx screwdrivers and an exacto knife will take care of that. Pretty hard for a cellular modem to transmit data when the traces to the antenna are cut.

          • hessenjunge@discuss.tchncs.de
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            23 hours ago

            Some require you to be online.

            I’d take it back to the store as broken. Never heard of that though.

            Some took it a step further and are equipped with 4/5G modems to bypass your network restrictions.

            Never heard of this either and it would raise a massive stink in the EU. Can you share an example?

            • 𝕸𝖔𝖘𝖘@infosec.pub
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              17 hours ago

              Both of these were in the USA. The first was with a friend’s purchase, the latter was an article he sent me. It’s been a little while, but I know one was Samsung, but can’t remember the other brand or which was which.

              • hessenjunge@discuss.tchncs.de
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                15 hours ago

                I wouldn’t put it past Samsung to try and force you to have internet access enabled so they can spy on you.

                However having additional hardware to directly access the internet via cellular is a bit much. That might have been an Aprils fools article by some IT site.

                When Sony tried to install root kits on PCs of folks just trying to watch a movie on a legit purchased DVD there was a quite large removedstorm.

                • 𝕸𝖔𝖘𝖘@infosec.pub
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  14 hours ago

                  Not an April fools, but it might have been a plan they (whoever it was) chose to later not follow through with.

                  I vaguely remember the Sony fiasco.

      • Piece_Maker@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 day ago

        Which is an entirely fair compromise for people who use Lemmy, but means precisely nothing to the majority.

        • locuester@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          11 hours ago

          Well that’s not true. They have been in business for 40 years. They sell TVs for people who don’t want anything except video in. Mainly commercial places like offices, stadiums, etc.

            • locuester@lemmy.zip
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              2 hours ago

              I’m not understanding what the point is that you’re trying to make? I’m sorry.

              • Piece_Maker@feddit.uk
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 hour ago

                I said that the privacy concerns being worth the cost of a “smart”-free TV means nothing to the majority of people.

                You said that this isn’t true, and that their main customer is commercial places.

                I suggested, in response to this, that the majority of people don’t own such commercial places.

                What part are you not understanding?