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.
Fine, but I don’t want the smart features to be installed at all in the first place.
I don’t want a WiFi antenna or Ethernet port in there.
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.
I don’t want them to have any of my data, and I don’t want to spend money “voting” with my dollar for these data collection devices.
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).
Fuuuck that. I don’t want my dollar supporting this, at all, plain and simple. And I don’t want to pay a premium for the privilege of buying a technically simpler device. I do, but it’s bullshit, and I’m unhappy about it.
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.
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.
Actually, it’s true. Amazon’s sidewalk works in a similar way, where if the sensor is not connected to the internet, it will talk to local Echo devices like your speakers that are connected to the internet and pass the data to Amazon through your device’s network.
TVs will look for open Wi-Fi networks. And failing that, they could very well do this exact same thing.
Edit: The way it works is that the echo devices contain a separate radio that works over the 868 to 915 megahertz industrial scientific and medical band, so the sensor communicates with your echo that way, and then your echo communicates it to the network as if it’s coming from the echo itself, not another device. So the sensor gets connected to the network without your network realizing that it’s actually a third-party device. To your network, the only thing it sees is the Echo, but to the Echo, it sees both your network, which it’s connected to, and the sensor, so it’s acting as a relay.
I forgot the Sidewalk is a thing. While that tech does kind of do what OP was saying, Sidewalk is limited to only Amazon Sidewalk compatible devices, like the echo line and ring. Just at a quick glance, there are no smart TVs that can connect to that network.
That said, it is an opt out service, which it awful. No smart TVs will connect, but I’d recommend disabling for anyone that uses Amazon devices.
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.
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.
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.
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).
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.
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.
Fine, but I don’t want the smart features to be installed at all in the first place.
I don’t want a WiFi antenna or Ethernet port in there.
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.
I don’t want them to have any of my data, and I don’t want to spend money “voting” with my dollar for these data collection devices.
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).
Fuuuck that. I don’t want my dollar supporting this, at all, plain and simple. And I don’t want to pay a premium for the privilege of buying a technically simpler device. I do, but it’s bullshit, and I’m unhappy about it.
Ummm, wut? I’m going to need some quality sources to back this claim up.
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.
Actually, it’s true. Amazon’s sidewalk works in a similar way, where if the sensor is not connected to the internet, it will talk to local Echo devices like your speakers that are connected to the internet and pass the data to Amazon through your device’s network.
TVs will look for open Wi-Fi networks. And failing that, they could very well do this exact same thing.
Edit: The way it works is that the echo devices contain a separate radio that works over the 868 to 915 megahertz industrial scientific and medical band, so the sensor communicates with your echo that way, and then your echo communicates it to the network as if it’s coming from the echo itself, not another device. So the sensor gets connected to the network without your network realizing that it’s actually a third-party device. To your network, the only thing it sees is the Echo, but to the Echo, it sees both your network, which it’s connected to, and the sensor, so it’s acting as a relay.
I forgot the Sidewalk is a thing. While that tech does kind of do what OP was saying, Sidewalk is limited to only Amazon Sidewalk compatible devices, like the echo line and ring. Just at a quick glance, there are no smart TVs that can connect to that network.
That said, it is an opt out service, which it awful. No smart TVs will connect, but I’d recommend disabling for anyone that uses Amazon devices.
Yeah, I was just using Sidewalk as an example of something a smart TV could use something like that.
deleted by creator
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.
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.
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.
Honestly? Get a large monitor and a sound bar.
Your tv price is subsidized by the presence of those network connections. I recommend using universal remote.
Sometimes that doesn’t even matter anymore; they’ll refuse to work now without a network set up.
If it wants a network then stick it on an isolated VLAN with no internet access.
That’s not what that means and you know it. It refuses to work unless it can successfully phone home over the Internet.
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.