I much prefer my old dumb TV that has a Roku plugged into it. Oh yeah, and I know it's not WATCHING ME.
But also, why do you not expect your Roku / apple tv / etc to be watching you?
http://www.samsung.com/us/business/displays/digital-signage/
Prices are much higher though.
Not that much higher ... maybe double ?
Remember, the digital signage displays are often used in arrays of 12 or 18 or 24 displays, so they have to be somewhat cost-competitive - otherwise an airport or hotel lobby or mall couldn't stitch 24 of them together.
I always chime in on these discussions to urge folks to buy a digital signage / commercial display (probably from NEC). Not only are they as dumb as dumb gets, but they are also very, very high performance displays.
It's probably because of the ad blockers but still a site should be a little functional without all the scripts and ads.
Don't connect it to the Internet? Barring the manufacturer sneaking a backup cellular modem in there, seems like it's an easy fix.
Hisense is also now selling under the Sharp brand name.
Would you be so kind to provide links to these products? I am interested in a high-quality display without smart features.
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/askjack/2016/sep/08/c...
I suppose you could just buy a new smart TV and not inform it of its WiFi details.
Does like everything stop working without internet now? ...sigh
This has been very economic, and environmentally friendly, and I can't see why we can't continue for several more years with the same screen.
Know what was state-of-the-art in embedded CPUs 10 years ago? The original iPhone. It had a 400 MHz single-core processor with 128MB RAM. Do you think app developers that have quad- and octo-core CPUs and literally 8 or 16 times the memory are going to optimize for the old platform, or build and maintain several versions of their applications?
Personally I'd rather spend of $35 ~ $200 every few years, instead of $800 ~ $2000, to have an up-to-date system.
I'm guessing that this doesn't just mean that it comes in the same box as the tv set.
Now, I know this is just a single anecdote, and that it could very well have been a coincidence, and that in the grand scheme of thing this is one of the more innocuous uses of tracking, but it was still a somewhat though-provoking experience.
"In a departure from the trend toward smarter and smarter sets, the Vizio P-Series lacks built-in smart-TV features. It’s basically a dumb TV, not just lacking apps but also dispensing with a tuner."
If you're using a STB, that hardly matters, but I'd think a cord-cutter would like the option to plug an antenna in the back and watch OTA stations without needing extra hardware.
I dont ever see myself using autonomous, internet connected cars. I cant think of a bigger hacking target for terrorists and mischief makers alike.
And their response was basically "yeah, it's not that big of a deal, don't worry about it". Someone with really bad intentions could set up a few arduinos/rPIs in populated cities, set them to broadcast the 'inject insulin' command and then sit back and watch people drop dead if they wander within range.
Scary stuff.
The scary stuff I worry about is what an evil scientist, like the one from 12 monkeys, could do with a deadly virus. This type of evil gets more far more "bang for the buck". I guess both are equally plausible. I might worry more about your scenario if I were diabetic!
I disagree. The remote and disconnected nature of this renders it less real than say killing a person with a knife. You don't have to witness first hand the yelling, screaming, pleading, suffering, etc. and finally the moment when a person sublimates from a living, breathing, unique being to a lifeless husk. It's like pushing a button to kill someone...it can be so far away that it's not quite real.
When I was younger, I spent time on 4chan's /b/ and could see some of the more deranged+immature members of the community doing things like this for the lulz or using some half-baked logic rooted in 20th century eugenics. Example A: Individuals like Dylan Roof who don't understand statistics and the context around it (I watched the entirety of his interrogation and he's borderline mentally challenged or autistic)
It only takes someone having it out for any specific individual who depends on the device. The OneTouch pump is a convenient murder weapon that could make the death look like an accident. (Or the possibility of many collateral casualties could be a plus to some.)
I have a "smart" home (well, parts of it -- it's expensive to do everything!).
It turns on a few select lights when it gets dark out, unless there are already lights on (eg: we're home) in which case it doesn't change anything. It turns lights off late at night in case we forget. It turns the front lights on at 30% between dusk and midnight, and cranks to 100% anytime between dusk and dawn if there's motion or the garage door is open (then gradually puts them back to what they were). Most useful, there's buttons on the kitchen keypad labelled "Dim" "Bright" and "Off" that adjust the lights over the island, sink, table, and under-cabinet and range hood (all separate). Another useful one is the "all off" button by the front door -- there's no corresponding "all on" because (as mentioned above) that happens automatically, and we never walk into a dark house.
All of it can be controlled from any PC/tablet/phone, and of course all of it could be done over the internet -- except that I don't have any of the ports open, because I don't see the point. The ability of connected switches to be controlled by other switches/motion/time yet still allow manual operation is very nice, and it's significantly cheaper than a massive re-wiring project.
I hate that there's this huge craze that confuses "smart" with "on the internet". It's an entire industry that is a solution to a problem that doesn't exist.
If I'm gone or even if I lose the phone, I really wonder if anyone else will ever figure out how to shut that off. They'll probably just throw the bulbs out.
By definition, this is what makes it smart. It's not the sophistication of the embedded hardware, it's the connectivity. The Echo Dot isn't anything special (and a bit overpriced IMHO). Wifi, Bluetooth Radio, 3.5mm audio out, decent mic, speakers about as good as free swag portable speakers, etc.
It is the industry the ones who try to force that on us.
http://www.nielsen.com/us/en/press-room/2015/nielsen-and-rok...
if the FTC had any sense - they should require disclosure at point of purchase.
I suppose if the streaming services I use were all compatible with e.g. ChromeCast I could use that, but until they are I'm pretty happy with the ui of the SmartTV. Most importantly, the kids can use Netflix without having their own smartphones.
I'm going to check the settings really carefully on the TV to see if I can at least maximize privzcy, but I wish there was something better such as a firewall setting I could use. Is there a guide for various manufacturers/models floating around somewhere?
In the past, Sony has picked confusing button mappings for the PS3 such that only Sony remotes worked well with it, but I haven't had a Sony device since then.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consumer_Electronics_Control
I got my dad a Roku but he didn't want it so I took it thinking I would return it but for Netflix and YouTube it's far faster than the same Samsung apps.
My plan to build a Pi 3 media box was set aside for now.
But yes wow such crap and mind games in these smart TVs when all I want is to see my video signal!