[kop316]

Thankfully it isn't quite that simple for electronics in the US. If it is sold commericially, it has to be registered with the FCC.

In this way, you at least know if it has WiFi, LTE, etc, and can see the module that is installed on it. This makes it much easier to go into the device and physically disable the radios on it.

Heck, maybe that is something like iFixit could do, have a how to to completely remove radio capabilities.

[echelon]

The average consumer won't be able (or even know) to disable built-in telemetry. As you can see from Facebook, invasive ads, DNA kits, and Alexa, most won't even care.

We've lost this battle. Our warnings weren't strong enough to win over those interested in convenience.

[maksimum]

> We've lost this battle.

I think you could look at the battle/war from a different perspectives, and come up with different conclusions.

In the mainstream (whatever that is?) it appears that convenience wins. And hardware/software vendors seem to make the assumption that customers won't complain if their data is harvested. I think that's where you're coming from?

On the (privacy) enthusiast things, the horizon looks much better. We've got great software that makes self-hosting easier: FreeNAS, Nextcloud, Docker, Plex, NixOS, etc. We have more choice in phones: we can still use "dumbphones", or use open source operating systems, or choose manufacturers with better privacy track records. I'm not familiar with consumer electronics as much, but buying low end/dumb devices (TVs, appliances) is still viable. And the open source home automation movement keeps getting traction with hardware and software.

[isomorphic]

> [privacy] [Plex]

Plex forces centralized Internet authentication for your locally-hosted server, and uses a variety of centralized services that have access to your served files' titles and other metadata. Furthermore Plex collects a variety of usage information statistics. I don't think it's possible to entirely opt out of these services or collection, or indeed use Plex at all without Internet access.

Although Plex claims to "care deeply" about privacy in its privacy policy, there is no blanket statement guaranteeing the privacy of your data and usage habits, or at least none without weasel words.

[navjack27]

I dunno. I just installed Plex server on my not internet connected Windows 10 NAS and it works fine locally.

[maksimum]

TIL... Thanks for highlighting this.

[mr_toad]

This is the main reason I prefer UMS to Plex.

[AngryData]

As someone who held out on smart phones until 2 months ago, nah, not having a smart phone isn't an option any more. Many jobs, even if not explicitly, require you to have a smart phone. Otherwise you can't read or see what your boss sends, you can't use their dumbass apps, you can't take and send pictures of customer complaints or problems, and ive even found places that requires you to have a smart phone just to sign up for their job application submission software.

Not having a smartphone is turning into luddite territory and you are looked down upon as less valuable in much of the modern world if you don't have one.

[jjgreen]

Being looked down on by someone who voluntarily carries a state-approved surveillance appliance, I can live with that.

[saagarjha]

> We have more choice in phones: we can still use "dumbphones", or use open source operating systems, or choose manufacturers with better privacy track records.

There are zero options on the market right now that come close to a modern smartphone.

[Avamander]

PinePhone? Librem? Even freed Android phones are actually very close.

[setpatchaddress]

Dumb TVs are not available anymore. I would gladly buy one with decent image quality if such existed.

[hypnotode]

They do, they just don't call them TVs. Look up commercial digital displays, exact same brands with the same screens as the consumer model but no tracking and bloatware. Of course, without the subsidies from selling your data, they're going to run you an extra 30-50%

[pixelface]

it's not just that, they're generally rated for 24/7 usage and feature much higher build quality - often with ultra thin bezels to allow them to be used in tiled arrangements.

whether that usage rating is related to any actual difference in the hardware is something i've pondered, but it is something they do specifically mention.

I wish it was only a 30-50% premium though as my experience is that they are an integer multiple of the equivalent consumer TV.

[grawprog]

>I wish it was only a 30-50% premium though as my experience is that they are an integer multiple of the equivalent consumer TV

You weren't kidding, just had a quick browse for some, they were between $5000-$17000 for sizes equivalent to home TVs.

[mirimir]

So just buy a large display. And sit closer.

Also makes it easier to watch DVDs and torrented stuff.

[x0x0]

I disagree. See the CA privacy law (CCPA) and the successor that will be on the ballot in November. Those give us the chance to establish meaningful defaults.

[Scoundreller]

And those pesky opt-outs are irrelevant anyway: we’ll just interpolate them from the available data.

[duckMuppet]

Well if they aren't doing anything wrong, they have nothing to hide...

[hellisothers]

For those downvoting I’m assuming this is sarcasm :D

[rhizome]

Here's a joke that's just as good: you know what happens when you assume, don't you?

[duckMuppet]

:)

[thih9]

> have a how to to completely remove radio capabilities.

We have no guarantee these devices would continue to work after such operation.

[netsharc]

Like Zune's DRM (luckily before Zune died they let purchasers download MP3s). I wonder what funny failure scenarios we'll see in the future.

On the topic of Samsung, their "smart" Fridge had issues when Google changed its API: https://support.google.com/calendar/forum/AAAAd3GaXpEWgy9gKk... , but at least that's some stupid feature and not a fridge's main feature...

[jdnenej]

Games have been becoming unplayable due to DRM servers shutting down. IoT devices are becoming bricks when they go out of support.

DRM and internet dependency are the ultimate tools in capitalisms planned obsolescence toolbox. You no longer have to wait for a product to fail, you can simply remotely destroy it so the customer buys a new one.

[pdkl95]

While topics like privacy and DRM are important, framing the discussion in those terms de facto obscures/distracts from the issue of property rights. Using someone's property (to e.g. to spy on them) after they purchased it is usually some sort of crime: trespassing, theft, vandalism, etc. If "intellectual property" is "property", then destroying someone's property (with DRM or other remote control) is a crime such as vandalism. The manufacturer lost their rights at the first sale of the good to the customer.

This is why tech companies have been pushing to reframe the sales of their goods as a service. They abuse[1] copyright by claiming yu need to license the software/firmware. This is like claiming when you purchase a book it isn't your property because they only "licensed" the book's story. However, trying to extend copyright (which only grants rights related to making more copies) into property rights is a misuse of copyright[1].

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_misuse

[kortilla]

> DRM and internet dependency are the ultimate tools in capitalisms planned obsolescence toolbox.

They are also the ultimate tools in authoritarian government’s toolboxes. Nothing like the ministry of truth having the ability to prevent the citizens from seeing unapproved “harmful” content that might disrupt society’s harmony.

As the sibling points out, the real issue here is the devaluation of property rights (more specifically your control over your own devices). These type of controls should be fought even in non-capitalist environments.

[kop316]

Sorry should be more clear. I mean how to physically remove such capabilities.

[RandomBacon]

I interpreted as: we have no guarantee that they won't need an internet connection to operate.

[ghaff]

Not saying a manufacturer might not think about making a TV that must be connected to the internet but, even leaving aside privacy etc. issues, that's a huge minefield. Not everyone has internet everywhere that they might care to install a TV.

And it wouldn't take much for Best Buy or Walmart to stop carrying your product after one too many customers return it because it wouldn't work.

[nitrogen]

People made this argument about Steam, Battlenet, game DRM, etc. But it happened anyway.

[ghaff]

Yes, but those are things you install. Some services require an Internet connection and people accept that. You can’t use Netflix without an internet connection either (although you can download to watch offline). That’s different from taking a TV home and it not working even as a dumb display because you don’t have an internet connection.

[kop316]

Ahh, I misunderstood! I would say that is when it gets returned if I need internet to operate my TV.

[PaulWaldman]

Can there be a balance? I'd love to remotely control and view the status of my appliances without sending the telemetry to the OEM. Physically disabling all the radios would prohibit this functionality.

[ljm]

I reckon that, given enough time, it’ll go the same was as everything else. Either you pay a subscription to remote it (and the inevitable ads that will appear), or you pay a premium for something without that functionality.

I don’t see how this stops. Advertisers will stop at nothing to invade your life, and businesses are more than happy to facilitate them if they get some more money out of it.

[PaulWaldman]

Agreed. Adding to this, consumers in general are failing to quantify the cost of giving up their personal data.

[ljm]

Even more, how do we quantify the price of our attention and our lives? You can use Facebook for free but as well as having hyper-targeted adverts thrown in your face, they are also vacuuming any single point of individuality you might possess, because everyone in the industry is brokering the data like a private commodity that we can never actually know anything about. IMO, Facebook is not worth the price of that level of pervasive, perverse, surveillance. Neither is Google.

Things like GDPR absolutely help but they're not retroactive, and chances are there is no way of clearing all of that up given how many millions of servers might have a trace of it.

Our current situation is where technology is leeching from humanity but humanity is okay with it because they get stuff for free.

[eclipxe]

I mean, yes? People want free stuff. The cost has to be paid somehow. If that is eyeballs and data then so be it.

[14]

Won't this create an opportunity for someone to enter the market with a TV that uses no ads or telemetry? Surely it is obvious there are millions of people who don't want smart TV's you would think a company offering a dumb TV would thrive. Are we just not at that point yet?

[alias_neo]

I guess part of the problem is brand recognition. 95% of a TV is the screen, and Samsung, LG, Sony and perhaps a couple of others own that market between them.

I see neither Samsung, LG, nor Sony getting on board, so you'd have to be buying their panels and do a good job with the electronics for people to but then.

That's fine in the ultra-premium space, the price to the consumer will cover the R&D, but mainstream, you'll just be Hannspree or something that has good panels but nobody knows our cares about you.

[rhizome]

Root + alternate ROM

[tornato7]

Is there much of a community for installing alternate ROMs on IoT devices?

[tomatocracy]

Not sure it quite compares to the phone custom ROM community in size but there is an active community. I've reflashed cheap wifi IoT devices which otherwise wanted to phone home with Tasmota[0] which seems like a relatively active project. There are other similar efforts too. You could also consider eg home assistant, openhab or domoticz to form part of this type of community and they're very active.

0. https://github.com/arendst/Tasmota

[pabs3]

Not sure how active it is but there is a community for installing open firmware on Samsung TVs:

http://www.samygo.tv/

[rhizome]

And I really have to think that the more companies add these misfeatures, the more effort is going to put into alternate ROMs/firmware for more consumer electronics.

[simpss]

yes, the first example I know from the top of my head is all the sonoff stuff.

They run a popular ESP8266 chip which people reflash.

https://duckduckgo.com/?q=sonoff+reflash&t=canonical&ia=web

[babuskov]

> This makes it much easier to go into the device and physically disable the radios on it.

Wouldn't opening the device void the warranty?

[sokoloff]

Why are people so worried about preserving the warranty on their electronics? If it lasted 30 days and you don’t break it while futzing with it, it’s likely to work through the warranty period anyway. If it doesn’t, buy another one. TVs are ridiculously inexpensive now.

I see people online waiting years (perhaps 5% of their life) to mod their cars or electronics for fear of losing the warranty.

Side note: Magnuson-Moss in the US prevents manufacturers from failing to honor their warranty because of totally unrelated modifications (or for opening a device without damaging it). “Warranty void if sticker removed” is almost certainly inaccurate legally.

[xvector]

> If it doesn’t, buy another one. TVs are ridiculously inexpensive now.

If you buy a mediocre one, sure? Good OLED TVs today still cost thousands. They are a big ticket purchase for most buyers. Hesitance in breaking them open is entirely sensible.

[ghaff]

And "ridiculously cheap" is still a few hundred dollars in most cases. Which is still a decent chunk of money for a lot of people.

[alias_neo]

I'd say TVs, like mobile phones, are the sort of thing people spend beyond their means on, this makes it an even more expensive purchase, and a lot of people probably don't have the tools, the knowledge or the experience to crack open a flat panel TV without damaging it.

[lonelappde]

More of an issue is that the devices will be single SoC and soldered together so removing a part risks frying the whole thing.

[kop316]

Nope!

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-switch/wp/2018/04/11...

[lonelappde]

That's for removing a sticker. Not for removing a whole module or messing with wiring.

[kop316]

The law quoted states a manufacturer cannot invoke a void warrenty for modifications unrelated to the warrenty claim. For example, if I replace the radio in my car, the manufacturer cannot said i voided my warrenty if the engine has problems (unless the modification did damage it).

So I would argue yes, if i disable the radios and something unrelated is damaged, then the warranty is still valid.

[lonelappde]

No doubt it's a judgment call for the court, but your car radio is farther from the engine then your TV wifi module is from the TV receiver. Your TV is all likely to be on the same DC circuit, maybe even all soldered together on one board.