Hacker News Reader

Comment by anshumankmr | Hacker News Reader

I am quite ambivalent to this feature. On one hand, if someone steals your TV, you can deactivate it. But now there is also a benefit to having a dumb TV. Imagine if you have too old of a model, so Samsung decides to remotely disable your TV.

View on HN

While not the same, crippling of Smart TVs already exists - their apps become incompatible with latest youtube, netflix, etc. APIs and therefore become less usable. You can get away from that with a smart stick, but then, you could've bought dumb tv instead.

I suspect you can not block your TV, if someone steals it. This is bad idea and a slippery slope towards various versions of nonsense.

My samsung TV was never connected to the internet. I didnt even accept the user agreement, it still works just fine.

Just wait until they include Amazon Sidewalk, so the TV can connect using your neighbor's internet connection to download the latest ads.

Physically eliminating the RF capabilities of a device without impacting the rest of its functions is usually feasible with enough patience. Your options include blocking external radiation (add copper mesh/foil), or destroying the device's antennas.

Modern TVs come with remotes that only work via Bluetooth, not via IR, and which are required for using the TV.

I really love this kind of hacking but I hate several things.

1. That it's even necessary

2. That any non-techie would immediately be against even unscrewing anything on their own devices

Sure, I'm glad to do this on my own devices. But those willing to has gotta be a sample size of so small, its no bigger a deal than a statistical anomaly.

There's the missing link to make the living room mounted telescreen a reality.

I loathe the day where manufacturers start requiring Internet access because you know that most people won't think twice about it. And they'll also all do it within a couple years of each other.

A user agreement of a TV is hilarious now that I think about it. It’s surely a load of disclaimers and agreements that they can violate various privacy laws, but made after you have handed over the money.

Then the millions of old TV owners sue Samsung for trespass to chattels? That would be a horrible decision both financially and publicity-wise.

The benefit this gives to having a dumb TV is that it makes it more attractive to thieves.

I don't know how exactly consumer behaviour works in America when it comes to televisions but in India, most people hold on to their TVs for at least a decade. So yeah this would not fly in a place like India. But in America, if the average consumer changes their television far quicker than here, it is likely very few will remain holding onto TVs older than 10 years. So the complaints of people will fall onto deaf ears.

This is one possible outcome only. But I feel this is quite likely.

Nah, I think that's pretty normal here in America too. I've never met someone who's bought a replacement TV for a reason other than that their old one broke, besides ~10 years ago when everyone upgraded from CRTs to flat-screen HDTVs.

And you don't even need a public outcry about it. Just enough people to make a class-action worth it.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com