• dan@upvote.au
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      3 months ago

      You can have a smart TV but never set up any of the smart features. I have two LG OLED TVs but rarely touch anything on the TV itself. I’ve got Nvidia Shields for streaming and turning it on or off also turns the TV on or off. Same with my Xbox.

      I just need to figure out if I can use CEC with my SFF gaming PC (so that turning it on also turns the TV on, and turning it off turns the TV off), then I won’t have to touch the TV’s remote again.

      Ethernet port or wifi are good for controlling the TV using something like Home Assistant. I have my TVs on a separate isolated VLAN with no internet access. I have a automation that runs when the TV turns on, to also turn on some LED lights behind the TV.

        • Null User Object@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          17
          ·
          3 months ago

          Some of these devices have even been known to look for other similar devices within WiFi range, and phone home that way (i.e., send analytics data via a neighbor’s connected TV as a proxy).

          Ummm, wut? I’m going to need some quality sources to back this claim up.

          • BassTurd@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            3 months ago

            Yea, this paragraph feels like fear mongering. I’m not saying OP didn’t see that somewhere, but from a tech standpoint, the TV still has to authenticate with any device it’s trying to piggy back off the wifi for. Perhaps if there were any open network in range it could theoretically happen, but I’m guessing that it’s not.

            I do remember reading that some smart TV was able to use the speakers as a mic to record in room audio and pass that out if connected. It may have been a theoretical thing but it might have been a zero day I read about. It’s been some years now.

        • dan@upvote.au
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          3 months ago

          I totally get where you’re coming from. It’s hard to find devices like that. I think the issue is that regular customers are demanding the smart features, and using them without caring about privacy aspects.

        • vithigar@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          3 months ago

          I know that sounds ridiculous, since I can “simply not use them,” but I want to spend my money on an appliance, not a consumer data collection tool.

          For what it’s worth you’re actually spending the manufacturer’s money (or at least some of their profit margin) on a data collection device that they won’t get to use.

          Smart devices are cheaper because the data collection subsidizes them.

        • FreedomAdvocate@lemmy.net.auBanned from community
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          3 months ago

          Some of these devices have even been known to look for other similar devices within WiFi range, and phone home that way (i.e., send analytics data via a neighbor’s connected TV as a proxy).

        • ccunix@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          3 months ago

          They are called “Digital Signage Panels” and they cost an arm and a leg.

          The data collection subsidises the cost of your TV, so that brings the cost down. Also, digital signage panels are rated for 24/7 use, which significantly increases their cost.

        • olympicyes@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 months ago

          Your tv price is subsidized by the presence of those network connections. I recommend using universal remote.

      • 4am@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        3 months ago

        Sometimes that doesn’t even matter anymore; they’ll refuse to work now without a network set up.

        • dan@upvote.au
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          3 months ago

          If it wants a network then stick it on an isolated VLAN with no internet access.

          • grue@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            3 months ago

            That’s not what that means and you know it. It refuses to work unless it can successfully phone home over the Internet.

            • dan@upvote.au
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              3 months ago

              So people in rural areas without good internet, or places where the network is airgapped, can’t use them at all? Seems like there’s be a way around it.

    • olympicyes@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      3 months ago

      I blacklist the TVs Ethernet and WiFi MAC addresses. I strongly encourage using a computer, Apple TV, or anything that can’t fingerprint everything you use your tv for.

    • iopq@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      No, I want only one DP port and to have a separate box that selects sources. That way I have the ports I want