There have been multiple accounts created with the sole purpose of posting advertisement posts or replies containing unsolicited advertising.

Accounts which solely post advertisements, or persistently post them may be terminated.

Roku’s Ultimatum: Surrender Jury Trial Rights or Lose Access to Your TVs

Did your Roku TV decide to strong arm you into giving up your rights or lose your FULLY FUNCTIONING WORKING TV? Because mine did.

It doesn’t matter if you only use it as a dumb panel for an Apple TV, Fire stick, or just to play your gaming console. You either agree or get bent.

tsonfeir ,
@tsonfeir@lemm.ee avatar

It should be illegal to make some give up the right to litigation.

PeachMan ,
@PeachMan@lemmy.world avatar

This is suuuuuuuper common, most software makes you agree to some sort of arbitration clause. It doesn’t mean that you can’t sue them, it’s just an obstacle to deter you.

gian ,

Only where going to court could bankrupt you.

rizoid ,
@rizoid@lemmy.dbzer0.com avatar

I’m putting together a parts list for a new living room set up. We’re getting a giant digital signage display and connecting it to my htpc.

laurelraven ,

I just got that on my Roku device and clicked through it without even realizing because it was the exact type of pop-up and position and timing as when it informs me that the micro SD card has successfully mounted, and it took my brain a second to register that 1) the pop-up was much larger, and 2) I briefly saw a word that looked like “arbitration”

How can this be a legally enforceable contract?! Especially considering if I didn’t agree, my device that I’ve already paid for and have been using would cease functioning and they sure as hell aren’t going to refund my purchase from years ago if I refuse

swearengen ,

How can this be a legally enforceable contract?!

I’d like to think it can’t be but it’s the US so who knows.

Changing the terms after buying the device and in a way that your kid could accept them by hitting ok on the remote is bonkers.

WhatAmLemmy ,

Yeah, that’s some dystopian neo-feudalist horseshit I’d only expect to fly in a bunch of the world’s most corrupt shit holes, including the USA.

monkeyman512 ,

They have more money to spend on lawyers is how.

laurelraven ,

I hate that this is so true

frostysauce ,

It doesn’t matter if it is legal or enforceable. Who’s going to stop them?

Murdoc ,

This is called a Deceptive Pattern (or dark pattern). This feature worked exactly as intended in your case.

soggy_kitty ,

They can’t prove you read it, maybe your child pressed accept. This is not legally binding in Europe

Bizarroland ,
@Bizarroland@kbin.social avatar

You could conceivably have a basis for a lawsuit against them if you do not agree to the binding arbitration for their disabling of the hardware that you had purchased from them.

However, do not forget that binding arbitration is still a legal process and does require them to treat it with the same gravity as a court trial would otherwise require, so even if you have agreed to The binding arbitration limitation, should something go awry you still have grounds and a space to take them to court, and in many cases, binding arbitration is much faster and more convenient for all parties than using the court system.

MeanEYE ,
@MeanEYE@lemmy.world avatar

In USA, EULA are god. You have no rights other than right to give them money.

Shady_Shiroe ,
@Shady_Shiroe@lemmy.world avatar

Is it even possible to like reflash certain TVs cuz it kinda seems like you may be better off buying a large ass monitor with a pi or potato PC attached.

refurbishedrefurbisher ,

Pretty sure EULAs are unenforcable in the US since nobody can reasonably be expected to read every single one of them for every one that they agree to.

VindictiveJudge ,
@VindictiveJudge@lemmy.world avatar

I think it’s more that you have to purchase the item before you can agree to the EULA. That said, it’s extremely rare for anyone to try and challenge them in court, and when they do they pretty much always settle so the court can’t actually demand any changes to EULAs.

MeanEYE ,
@MeanEYE@lemmy.world avatar

Analysis of how EULAs are reviewed by courts depends primarily on whether the particular EULA is determined to be a contract for the sale of goods, and thus governed by the terms of the UCC, or whether it is a contract for services, and, accordingly, governed by the common law.’ Although it may be of little practical import (because even those contracts governed by the UCC can be modified to waive a consumer’s traditional Article 2 inspection and rejection rights), it is important to understand the framework by which software-and by extension videogames - are analyzed by courts in the United States.

From the document Rated “M” for misleading.

zarkanian ,
@zarkanian@sh.itjust.works avatar

Yeah right lmao

So, all these companies are wasting money getting their lawyers to write up (and maintain) these documents that we all have to agree to, but they’re totally unenforceable because… they’re too wordy?

If you believe that, I have a bridge to sell.

just_another_person ,

The companies have the burden to provide them to the user. If they forget something, somebody loopholes them in court, they will lose.

The EULA is more of a rolling document, and something like a “We are legally obligated to provide this, so we better cover our asses in the process.” legal doc.

Iamdanno ,

They are unenforceable for more reasons than that. They also can not prove that you agreed to it, only that someone did.

Also, they can’t change the terms of your previous purchase after the fact. They can make you agree to something new going forward, but if they make your current device a brick because you don’t agree (which they are doing here), then they need to reimburse you for causing the loss of use of your device that you already purchased and was working under the previous terms.

deezbutts ,

Dude this is totally how it works.

You have general counsel, firms on retainer, etc and the cost is amortized over all legal needs… And 99.999% of users will never even THINK about legal action nevermind actually pursue it.

It’s the same reason they send C&D letters…an ounce of legal effort (which you likely already have to buy anyway as a corporation) is worth a TON of consumer litigation protection.

grue ,

You have general counsel, firms on retainer, etc and the cost is amortized over all legal needs… And 99.999% of users will never even THINK about legal action nevermind actually pursue it.

The exception to that is class action suits, where 100% of users could be included in the class even if they have no idea it’s going on. Especially when the company does too little harm to any one person for it to be worthwhile to sue individually but a fuck-ton of harm in aggregate, this is the only way to hold them accountable.

And that’s what these forced arbitration agreements are designed to neuter.

GladiusB ,
@GladiusB@lemmy.world avatar

Surely corporations aren’t being intimidating to take the uneducated for a ride when they dispute it. Surely.

cogman ,

Yup.

Because here’s the thing, lawyers are super expensive and these corporations have in house lawyers for handling anyone that wants to sue. They’ll happily argue the validity of the EULA because they know just getting through the pretrial phase will cost you tens if not hundreds of thousands of dollars.

Corporations have weaponized this fact at every chance they get.

It’s the exact same reason why companies in California and other states make employees sign noncompetes, even though they are explicitly unenforceable. It’s so the company can financially punish you even if you are in the right.

refurbishedrefurbisher ,

This is what I like to call “bullying”. I don’t think anyone should be able to hire private lawyers. All lawyers, no matter how rich you are or if you’re a corporation, should be public and randomly assigned dictated by a random number generator and a publicly viewable algorithm IMO.

The US has the right to a fair and speedy trial in its constitution. Current litigation is niether.

mods_are_assholes ,

The only argument i have gotten against this is “But what if I get a shitty lawyer? I should be able to pay what I want for the quality of lawyer I desire.”

It doesn’t seem like a strong argument to me but to those who use it as a reply it seems rock solid?

kofe ,

Can’t you request a new lawyer if you feel yours isn’t representing you well? Or appeal based on that?

mods_are_assholes ,

I never said they were MY arguments

cogman ,

The other route that could work is public civil defenders. It requires the government to properly fund and staff, but having a legal firm sponsored by the state willing and ready to take up cases would mean that the private entities can still get their lawyers but they can’t steam roll over someone that doesn’t make $500k a year.

Of course, there could be corruption issues. I wouldn’t want the lawyer on my case being drinking buds with the lawyer on the opposing side.

mods_are_assholes ,

This is a good compromise but frankly I think all lawyers should be government employees assigned by the court with 3rd party independent oversight.

Its not perfect but it is better than ‘if you are rich you will likely win or just drive your opposition into poverty’.

mods_are_assholes ,

t’s so the company can financially punish you even if you are in the right.

This doesn’t make sense to me. If it’s unenforceable, what happens if you just ignore any demands from the suing company?

108 ,

Welcome to the US system of justice it’s shitty all over and built for the rich to tap dance around.

mods_are_assholes ,

That’s why I advocate heavily for the environmental and economic benefits of consuming the wealthy.

108 ,

Makes me wonder what eating a cow that has eaten delicacies its whole life would taste like

mods_are_assholes ,

Chewy and bitter especially close to the skin, and gamey depending on diet. The more meat, the more gamey. I wonder what vegetarians taste like.

108 ,

Chicken

mods_are_assholes ,

People like to say that but human flesh is a lot oilier and has a different texture.

108 ,

It was a joke.

They call it Long Pig for a reason

mods_are_assholes ,

I mean that may have been right during the era of Moby Dick but with our modern diets, none of the human flesh I’ve tried has even been close to palatable.

Patch ,

If a company takes you to court, you can’t just decide to ignore them. Either you/your representative turns up on the designated court dates and presents a case, or you’ll most likely lose by default.

If it was possible to make a court case go away just by ignoring it then everyone would just do that.

mods_are_assholes ,

If an EULA is not a binding contract, what standing do they have to bring forth a case?

Patch ,

An EULA is nominally a binding contract, in the sense that it is presented as such. No court has ever ruled and given precedent to the effect that EULAs are universally non-binding (because companies have always settled out of court for cases where it looks like they’re going to lose).

It is well understood that the arguments against EULAs being binding are solid ones, and that the reason why so many cases settle is because companies are not confident of winning cases on the strength of EULA terms, but you still need to go through the rigmarole of attending court and presenting your defence case. That’s how court cases work.

Edit: And perhaps more to the point of the OP, if you want to sue a company over some defect or service failure, it’ll be them who introduce the EULA as a defence, and it’ll be for you/your lawyers to argue against it. Which adds complexity and time to what might otherwise have been a straightforward claim, even if you win.

mods_are_assholes ,

Fuck every paragraph of our legal code then, this isn’t justice, this is just another layer of protection for the owner class.

cogman ,

You get sanctioned and maybe even thrown in jail.

You HAVE to participate and pray that the judge in the case is willing to listen to you arguments for dismissal. If you don’t do that much a judge is free to issue punishments for not participating. Sanctioning can be as bad as fines but could further be things like “Ok, you’ve failed to participate so we are going to assume you are guilty” (Which, btw, is what happened to Alex Jones. He did not participate in discovery in any of his cases and so got a default judgements in multiple cases).

If the judge decides that there is any sort of merit (and the standard for that is really low. Cases almost never get dismissed) you enter the most expensive part of trial, pretrial and discovery. This is where both sides get to see each others documents on the case and lawyers spend countless hours filing pretrial motions with the court. This is something that can literally last years and even decades, especially in civil matters which take a back seat on the docket to criminal cases. Generally speaking, this is why people and companies tend to settle. It’s a cost saving measure because making you way all the way to trial can easily dwarf the cost of settlement.

This also, btw, is why patent trolls are so effective. They’ll often ask for an amount low enough that most companies will just pay the fees yet high enough to keep them in business. Even if the patents themselves are potentially invalid.

Yes, it doesn’t make sense. In fact, a big issue is that we don’t have any sort of public civil defenders (we absolutely should). So for most individuals lawyers are prohibitively expensive. You basically have to either be rich, be lucky enough to have a case that aligns with a charitable legal organization’s goals, or luck out on a legal firm deciding to take your case pro bono for their own reasons.

mods_are_assholes ,

So let me get this straight, some rich fuck could sue me because he doesn’t like my haircut and if I don’t pony up cash to get a lawyer the judge will just assume the rich fuck is right?

Burn every inch of this corrupt as fuck system down.

cogman ,

You don’t have to get a lawyer, but you do have to respond to the lawsuit. That is, participation is not optional.

Now, there is protection from the “bad haircut” lawsuits. It’s called “Vexatious litigation”. If someone sues you for a bad haircut, and they’ve sued others for it as well, you can ultimately seek sanctions (including covering your legal fees) against them and their lawyers. That’s why you don’t generally see bad haircut lawsuits.

Further, if the lawsuit is so bad that it’s “bad haircut” level, it’s possible to get sanctions against the lawyer that filed it for wasting the courts time.

But again, participation isn’t optional here. You HAVE to respond to a lawsuit, you can’t just shut your eyes and hope it goes away.

mods_are_assholes ,

Still seems like a massive waste of time and money that anyone with means can just apply to anyone they feel like.

I mean IANAL but in a rational world there would be a minimum of grievance requirement before being able to file such a lawsuit.

We need tort reform but the average person just doesn’t seem to care until it affects them personally, and doesn’t have the context to understand it.

cogman ,

I mean IANAL but in a rational world there would be a minimum of grievance requirement before being able to file such a lawsuit.

There is, that’s what the discovery phase of the lawsuit is for. That’s what the dismissal phase of the lawsuit is for. The issue isn’t that these things don’t exist, it’s that these things are the most expensive parts of trial.

Imagine the reverse case where you find out someone has started a campaign to keep you from getting hired anywhere. You know they are doing this because someone tips you off on this happening.

You do not have enough evidence to prove that this is happening in court at the moment of the lawsuit but you are damn sure that the person you are suing has a trail of documents proving your allegation and if they don’t the third parties that didn’t hire you likely do.

If you find enough evidence you can get the person to settle before trial. If you don’t find any evidence you can either go to trial and lose or simply drop the lawsuit.

The unfortunate thing is gathering minimal evidence, which really is the job of lawyers beyond just knowing the law, is a time consuming task for someone (Usually multiple someones) that is pretty expensive.

Now, to the actual real problem. It’s actually 2 fold.

  1. Gigantic lawfirms gobble up basically all lawyers that have any sort of talent. This drys up the pool of lawyers available to represent people and consequently drives up prices, for everyone. These lawfirms can keep increasing their prices because their rich clients will pay for it and the smaller lawfirms that would represent your case can similarly raise prices because there is no competition.
  2. These gigantic lawfirms and big companies when they sue take a TON of time and resources from the court. You can expect 100 or 1000 issues being filed by one of these lawsuits just at the very beginning. They apply a “Well, there’s a 90% chance you’ll win without these motions, but there’s a 95% chance you’ll win with them. So we’ll file whatever we can to make sure every single avenue is explored. Oh, and we bill you for the hours we spent with our law ghouls scouring legal books in the dungeon.”

These 2 issues mean the courts are constantly flooded, any lawsuit (especially against someone with the resources) takes a long time to resolve, the cost will be astronomical on both sides because the legal team on the other side needs to respond to every court filing, and finally the number of available lawyers will go up because there is little competition forcing them to have lower prices.

The reform we need, if anything, is some sort of penalization on these giant firms for wasting time. Perhaps applying sanctions to the other side if it’s found that they spent 90% of their filings for stuff they never used.

yamanii ,
@yamanii@lemmy.world avatar

They are even more so on the US, maybe you were thinking of the European Union? Cause in the US you have no rights if the EULA says so.

en.m.wikipedia.org/…/ProCD,_Inc._v._Zeidenberg

mods_are_assholes ,

Its more complicated than that, EULA’s can’t require an illegal act, i.e.: If you don’t kill your cat you can’t use our service.

So they’re not perfectly binding if they don’t follow state and local law.

MeanEYE ,
@MeanEYE@lemmy.world avatar

While true, it would be up to you to prove their EULA is requiring an illegal act and then win that court case. Only then you could go after them for killing your cat. By the time you are done with legalese you are already broke and your cat is dead.

MeanEYE ,
@MeanEYE@lemmy.world avatar

In USA, they can supersede laws in some cases. Technically they can’t but you’d have to prove they do before you can sue the company. If you agreed in EULA that Roku can kill your dog if you stop paying for their service, they are within their right to do so. You’d have to go to court to free yourself from the EULA obligation first before Roku can get any punishment for killing an animal. Incredibly stupid.

SendMePhotos ,

Wait you’re both waiving rights? Does that mean they can’t sue you for copyright or anything also?

palitu ,

Yeah, it is basically to keep them out of Tue courts.

I don’t think they really care how you use the roku, just that they don’t get sued or class action’d

Alexstarfire ,

Tuesday courts? What happens on Tuesday?

palitu ,

https://aussie.zone/pictrs/image/dbd5e899-020b-428a-a942-444ee3d28839.webm

starman2112 ,
@starman2112@sh.itjust.works avatar

I cannot fathom how you would use their services in a way that they would get legally upset about

palitu ,

I do not think that this can be legal, if you have already agreed to terms.

Surely they can just say from now on, thing you have used for a year is not usable unless you promise not to sue us.

Surely that ship has sailed?

theherk ,

Pray they don’t alter them any further… or we’ll all end up riding a unicycle in a pink dress.

Plopp ,

That sounds like fun though!

feedum_sneedson ,

gender bending is played out; drab gray jumpsuits for everyone and no talking

the unicycles can stay as an approved method of personal transport

MeanEYE ,
@MeanEYE@lemmy.world avatar

EULAs are a magical playground in USA. If you agreed in initial terms that they can change this document in future with or without notifying you, then they are within their rights to change it.

palitu ,

Urgh.

ipkpjersi ,

Where I live, the way contract law (at least in regards to employment) works is generally you can’t alter terms (by imposing additional restrictions) after both parties have agreed to it unless there is some form of compensation provided for the restricted party in exchange for agreeing to those additional restrictions.

kandoh ,

I’ve been saying in other threads; if it has an internet connection you don’t own it, you use it with the parent companies permission

BreakDecks ,

That’s not a great metric. Plenty of devices connect to the Internet without sacrificing user privacy or freedom. It’s not connectivity that ruins the product, it’s where on the Internet that product connects, and if you are allowed to have control over how the product works.

We need to have better literacy about proprietary software, walled gardens, automatic updates, and the consequences to the user experience if you become dependent on these kinds of products.

But I don’t have much faith. Microsoft puts ads on the start menu and inside of Solitaire, and Windows remains solidly the most popular OS. People overwhelmingly let enshittification happen without serious resistance.

kandoh ,

Plenty of devices connect to the Internet without sacrificing user privacy or freedom

If they do, it’s only because the company allows it and all that is needed for that to change is one management decision.

jabjoe ,
@jabjoe@feddit.uk avatar

If you don’t have admin, and arguably source code, you don’t own it.

MeanEYE ,
@MeanEYE@lemmy.world avatar

Technically according to USA law you don’t own anything, ever. You own the medium, like plastic on CD, but not the data on it. You don’t own the music you own the right to reproduce recording for your own personal and enjoyment. By subscribing they are not selling you the access to service, they are giving your the right to use it for set period of time.

thisbenzingring ,

If you own one of those and you’re a US resident, contact your state attorney general.

Got_Bent ,

Ken paxton? Lulz, he’d probably come after me for saying anything.

PigsInClover ,

Before I even finished reading that comment I thought, “Fuck. Ken Paxton would probably just take it as inspiration to accept money from Roku.”

Congrats to those in other states though. I am envious.

Simulation6 ,

Good advice, depending on state. I think there is something in MD law that says you can’t sign away your legal rights.

catbum ,

Just an FYI, although they aren’t physical products like this Roku, many apps and digital services have added the very same binding arbitration clauses recently.

The McDonald’s app for one. I ended up deleting the app after it tried to force me into binding arbitration and I didn’t want to go through to opt-out process for marginally cheaper, shitty food, so I just deleted the app altogether and haven’t eaten there since November.

Watch out for it if you drive for doordash or ubereats as well. I opted out of both, although they claimed you couldn’t opt out in an new contract when you didn’t before (a bunch of BS, if the current contract you are about to sign says it supercedes all others, you can’t make the lack of an opt-out on a previous contract hold up).

On-going services might make sense for these shitty enough clauses, but to be strong armed into it for physical product you bought free and clear … Disgusting.

It’s like all these companies are locking themselves down to minimize legal exposure because they know that their services and products are getting more awful or something.

BothsidesistFraud ,

I legit don’t know how binding arbitration can be legal.

Agreeing to terms of actual usage of the product, I understand. Like for a pogo stick, assuming your own risk of injury.

But I don’t know how they can legally just say that suing is impossible.

tomkatt ,

Shit like this is why my LG C1 is restricted to LAN access only in my router (local network for automation purposes) and can’t communicate with the internet.

mods_are_assholes ,

As an IT guy: FUCK smart TVs, fuck them hard.

flambonkscious ,

…with a brick. Repeatedly

laughterlaughter ,

I will never buy a smart TV, ever. I don’t care if I’m left behind.

MeanEYE ,
@MeanEYE@lemmy.world avatar

Are there new TVs that are not smart?

laughterlaughter ,

There are, but they’re old or not of the best quality. Last time I had a Sceptre TV, and I had to use a sound bar because the speakers were awful. But it was as dumb as it could be, so I was happy with that.

Edit: The only reason I gave it up is because of lack of space in my new apartment. I miss that TV.

MeanEYE ,
@MeanEYE@lemmy.world avatar

Damn, so the solution is to buy whatever I want and castrate it with no access to internet.

laughterlaughter ,

Unfortunately. I personally prefer not to give money to those fuckers.

MeanEYE ,
@MeanEYE@lemmy.world avatar

Well, yeah, but eventually you’ll have to. I currently have old Toshiba LCD which is super awesome. Not thin but works like a charm and came with all the schematics and bill of materials so it can be easily repaired. Needless to say I don’t plan on replacing it, but panel itself has expiration date unfortunately.

laughterlaughter ,

No, I don’t really have to. I’ve lived without a TV for more than a year. I miss it sometimes, but it’s not like my life is falling apart because of it.

Awesome that you have a dumb TV. I’ll try and get me one as soon as I have extra space.

MeanEYE ,
@MeanEYE@lemmy.world avatar

Mine is used as extra display for gaming and watching movies. That’s it. However it is more comfortable to sit on sofa when watching.

starman2112 ,
@starman2112@sh.itjust.works avatar

Don’t worry about it, they sell the TVs at a loss because they expect to get the revenue back from ads. You’re costing them money when you buy one of their TVs.

A_Random_Idiot ,

only sceptre makes dumb TVs anymore, and their quality varries wildly

MeanEYE ,
@MeanEYE@lemmy.world avatar

That’s scary. Only solution then is to buy smart and castrate it.

A_Random_Idiot ,

What I did. I have two smart TVs.

Fuckers have never once been online. You can even go the extra mile and open them up and unplug the wifi antenna (or just remove the wifi card if its slotted and not integrated into the mainboard)

octopus_ink ,

I brought mine online long enough to do an initial firmware update. That was it. I may bring it online long enough to do another one, but I’m going to google first to be sure they haven’t done something like Roku here without my having heard about it.

A_Random_Idiot ,

I wouldnt even do that unless there is an actual issue you are having that can only be fixed with a firmware update.

nayminlwin ,

Lobotomize them after buying.

WaterWaiver ,

Ditto with my printer. Print over LAN: sure. Printer connect to internet: hell no, that’s the first-party version of printer malware.

dust_accelerator ,

Especially when printers ask you to waive your class action rights just like this.

Makes sense, when they illegally push straight up malware that sets the ink flow rate to 0 should non-geuine ink cartridges be detected. This will destroy/clog the print head if attempting to print for too long.

Yes, I reverse engineered your fucked up Linux 2.4 (!) based firmware, Epson. Your printer is printing nicely offline with refillable cheap ink. Fuck you, I won.

Sorry about the rant, it had become personal at one point.

WaterWaiver ,

Congrats :) The idea that a few software bits are between you and getting a pile of junk working is infuriating. Did you extract and modify an image from flash or find a way in live?

dust_accelerator , (edited )

I had a .bin where the change hadn’t been implemented and one after. Was using file carving tools as I was just trying to figure out what was going on. Probably spent too much time, but once I found out what it was doing, I was pretty mad. I tried to just corrupt the firmware to force a fallback to a “safe” state, but eventually I had to look into reverse engineering the binary that seemed to be controlling different things, such as the genuine ink check and things like that. Many hours of trial and error staring at the xxd and gdb output, semi randomly breaking things, until I seemed to break the right thing. Was bit tricky to get around the firmware signing, but eventually got that worked out too by tricking it into not checking (very old firmwares for that printer weren’t signed) and accepting the ‘new’ firmware, with a much higher version number, as that’s also one thing it checks to prevent downgrading.

Tools used as far as I remember were

  • binwalk,foremost, autopsy
  • radare2
  • This page I believe was helpful, at least i had it bookmarked
WaterWaiver ,

Nice, ty. I’ve only revenged PC firmware, not embedded, so I wouldn’t think of several of those tools.

I know a model of HP inkjet from my childhood that had a service/factory mode where ink checks were disabled. After years of claiming that its carts were empty I was suddenly able to print perfect full-colour pages. RIP HP Photosmart 3110

phreekno ,
@phreekno@lemmy.world avatar

I took the wifi chip and antenna right out of a roku TV. I don’t even want it broadcasting its MAC out to the world, fuck that

CosmicCleric ,
@CosmicCleric@lemmy.world avatar

I just posted about this in another community. I’ll just include the link below so I don’t double post.

lemmy.world/comment/8117710

corymbia ,

NOTHING SUSPICIOUS HERE. DO NOT FEAR. SIGN AWAY FUTURE LEGAL PROTECTION BECAUSE THERE IS NOTHING TO FEAR.

Onii-Chan , (edited )
@Onii-Chan@kbin.social avatar

Happy I stuck with my older Samsung dumb TV. Great screen, decent size, flat enough to mount on a wall, and does everything I need it to do regarding hooking up my little i5/8GB baby office PC turned media hub. I don't care that it's only 1080p, looks just fine when I'm in bed and watching movies on it. Even when smart devices were first becoming THE thing to have, the idea of having to download updates for my TV got me thinking about the more nefarious aspects of such tech the future may hold.

I think a lot of it comes down to me just not being very materialistic, or needing my household devices to be internet ready with installed apps and no way of managing permissions or data harvesting. Even my cars are older, and were made well before integrated SIM cards and constant data collection, and I've no plans to upgrade any time soon. I guess I just never 'got' the appeal of having a smart device that wasn't just my phone (and even then, I barely use any apps on my phone outside a web browser (which eliminates the need for most apps anyway) and the camera.)

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • •
  • [email protected]
  • random
  • lifeLocal
  • goranko
  • All magazines
    •