The solution was not to buy "smart" tv maybe decade and a half ago now. Or not act dismissively when anyone brought up wanting a dumb tv.
Nowadays it is genuinely hard to find a just a panel optimized as a tv. I also remain skeptical these revenue streams reduce the cost of the tv in any meaningfull way. Commercial monitors for example are a different product with different requirements for a commercial use, and thus audience. That wil have a large effect on price regardless of anything else.
Regardless, personally I would rather pay the cost upfront rather then be nickel and dimed and a/b tested and exploited and influenced for decades.
Regardless, personally I would rather pay the cost upfront rather then be nickel and dimed and a/b tested and exploited and influenced for decades.
Yeah, but would lots of other people? That's always been the issue with privacy concerns. I hate tracking, I hate ads, and I hate being spied on. I'm willing to pay an extra $1000 for a TV that doesn't do those things.
Is the average consumer though? Probably not. They will mostly just buy whatever has the biggest screen at the cheapest price.
Screen brightness, color reproduction, and contrast are all things that move the needle at the high end, but probably still isn't, even in the market that high end LG TVs compete in.
Its just something that, bafflingly to me, most people don't care about.
Its just something that, bafflingly to me, most people don't care about.
I've had family members buy Kindles that show ads, forever, because they're $20 bucks cheaper.
I've had friends decline for me to set them up with uBlock or a PiHole because 'ads really don't bother me'.
I'm no cyber guy, but I've been using adblockers for such a long time that when we're watching YouTube at a friend's house, the response to an ad break is 'What the fuck?'
I think most people have been habituated to the complete commercialization of the internet, including streaming, where it's viewed just how our parents' generation viewed ads on cable.
It's absolutely baffling when I show them how I can make all the ads stop and the response is 'eh, not for me.' And to be clear, as much as I am IT illiterate for Tildes, I am the person everyone comes to when The Internet Breaks, so I'm not known for being wildly imcompetent or bricking stuff.
I'd say most people hate these things, at least once they see what it actually looks like beyond 'close the ad'. They'll tolerate it, but they would also happily sign bans for this stuff in a heartbeat.
Baffling to me as well, but I think it really is just an abstract threat to most people. There is no immediate visible negative side effects as such, and unless we start seeing peoples private conversations being posted on billboards, then I don't think it will really be seen as a big deal for many people.
All the TV manufacturers engage in spyware in some capacity, even if it's "just" automated content recognition.
It's a good reason to keep them offline, to buy brands that aren't as egregiously bad, and to select TVs for the OS they run — something running Android TV for example is going to be easier to reign in than something running webOS, Tizen, or Roku OS for example because you can use the exact same set of tools you'd use to debloat an Android phone to do the same on the TV.
As an example, it's pretty easy to use ADB (Android Debug Bridge) on a laptop to disable/remove the ACR packages on a Sony TV, after which you're left with just plain old Android. Disabled/removed packages along with no internet connection is about the best one can achieve in a smart TV these days, as far as I'm aware.
Glad that I never once connected my LG TV to the Internet, I've always used it as just a monitor for my Roku (which so far I've yet to hear anything dystopian about them, I hope nobody dashes my naiveté) -- that also means I need to strike LG off of my future consideration list.
Seems like if the TV could use its wifi to sniff out an open router it would just connect and use it anyway, regardless of any configuration you might or might not have done.
I don't know about you, but I haven't seen an open SSID in years. I've heard this concern before, but realistically, where are people still running unauthenticated wifi networks?
I just opened up the network list on my laptop and saw two pop up, living in a fairly dense urban area (more than 20 total in range). One is "xfinitywifi" so the public hotspot, the other looked like maybe a default name for a router at a glance.
I see networks without WPA2/WPA3 a lot, but those are almost always locked down with captive portal authentication.
Xfinitywifi definitely is, as part of comcasts "Xfinitynow" service (which as a sidenote, is also fucked as a business model). LG TVs wouldn't have access to those without paying Comcast.
Its possible that someone is either running a 25 year old router, or manually removed the password on their AP, but basically any consumer wifi router of the past few decades has WPA2 authentication out of the box, and most of them have randomized passwords.
Its of course entirely possible to find open public wifi, but personally I've just never encountered it in the past 10 years or so.
That was just a cursory scan so good point about captive portals, been a while since I've used any of those and I haven't touched Comcast's myself so wasn't sure how locked down it was. Given the initial topic I wouldn't be surprised if LG was considering a deal with Comcast just for that kind of thing at this point.
After searching a bit I think the other one is some other kind of device going by name, maybe I could control someone else's air conditioner if I connected to it.
Given the initial topic I wouldn't be surprised if LG was considering a deal with Comcast just for that kind of thing at this point.
Yeah. If the data is valuable enough to them, that would absolutely be within the realm of possibility. I've also heard of manufacturers embedding LTE radios in devices for communication like this, but I have to imagine that an individuals data isn't valuable enough for that to make sense at scale for a TV.
Plus, they can count on 90% of people just connecting the thing to their wifi anyway, so all of these games are probably unnecessary for their bottom line.
If you are in an area with Xfinity you are in an area with open hotspots. I just looked on my wifi and found one after watching part of the Gamers Nexus video on this issue.
On that note, link to that GN video - I know it's in the article but I figure mentioning / linking it directly here would be a bit more accessible for those not reading through the article and just here for the forum discussion.
Pretty horrible practice from both the provider and the consumer's POV. As a consumer, you get to have random people siphoning the bandwidth you're paying for, and the risk of misconfigured ACLs on the device exposing your traffic.
As a provider, you get to lose out on potential customers who don't feel the need to pay you anymore when they can use their neighbors wifi through the wall for free.
No clue why a default open SSID would be desirable for anyone. (Except people who want to mooch off their neighbors wifi I guess)
When I had BT Internet, I could leech off the WiFi of any other BT customer. As they could mine.
Was sold as a feature. Of course, non BT customers could also pay for access.
In the apartment complex where mum lives they have a guest suite which I rent some times. The resident across the hall has EE internet so when I stay over, I pay for 1 day EE access so I can have some connectivity in the guest room, as there’s bugger all mobile signal.
I see this come up in pretty much any discussion about smart TVs, but I have yet to see someone documenting this actually happening. AI wasn’t able to find one either. It seems to me that, for something as straightforward as this to test, there would be at least some documented proof by now.
To be clear, they do upload tracking data when they have WiFi, and they will cache data to send once they have WiFi again. But I haven’t seen credible reports that they will connect to arbitrary unsecured networks to exfiltrate data.
The only thing that I'm certain Roku does do is "Automatic Content Recognition" (also mentioned in this video briefly), where it fingerprints content played over the HDMI connection and reports it for advertising purposes. Roku is absolutely an advertising company, just like all of these other smart TV companies are. I remembered there being an exposé about Roku doing this local device snooping waayyyy back in like 2015, but apparently TechCrunch amended that article to say that it was incorrect because Roku said it didn't do that, and I'm not immediately seeing anything more recent with evidence that it does.
Yea that's what I did too. I use Chromecast for streaming. It's also connected to my PC for gaming. I think most people recommend not using the native LG software and not connecting it to the internet lol
So, while we're on the subject, and before I blast my TV's electronics with a tactical nuke, what are the recommendations from people here for alternative set top boxes and other living room app, client and remote controller solutions?
I use an old school htpc setup on two different machines
An old Mac mini running Linux mint
An old minisforum
They work great for streaming and the minisforum can handle some light steam gaming. I use a basic Logitech keyboard with an integrated touch pad for control. We put all of our frequently used apps on the desktop and cranked up the desktop icon size so that they're easily viewable from distance.
I never made the jump to services like plex or jellyfin, we largely use Kodi for media consumption
Yep, this is similar to what I do. Very much depends on peoples' use cases and if they MUST have a "screen of apps" and a remote-navigable interface. I prefer a full desktop PC experience with a mouse/keyboard.
I have an inexpensive 58 inch Insignia "smart" TV that has FireTV built in- but it stays disconnected from any networks and has not attempted to connect to any access points without my explicit permission. It is set to startup on the same HDMI input every time and never go to the smart interface unless I explicitly request it via the remote to change settings.
For me, after having tried a Roku, Fire TV, and Apple TV and ditching them all for various reasons (each of them just being too annoying, restrictive, poorly-designed, or otherwise, for the amount of control I need/want to exert over my experience), I landed on my "set top box" being a mini PC with linux. Apps would have wildly different audio levels or be extremely buggy compared to their web counterparts, and so on.
I use a browser fullscreen for everything (Youtube, Twitch, Jellyfin- the occasional other service or video, depending). However, I acknowledge that I do not watch live TV or Netflix or any movies/TV in general, with very few exceptions to that rule, so my use case is quite different from many others.
I strongly prefer tabbed interfaces and don't like the "made-for-TV UIs" and "app" ecosystems. Strongly prefer being able to modify/compress/equalize my audio. Strongly prefer having an information-dense interface with no ads. Prefer having access to a full browser, alt-tabbing, and not being forced to use the "app" version of a particular service (like Twitch) which often is garbage compared to the website experience (especially since I use browser extensions and such to customize my experience on various services). I queue up things to watch in tabs. These tabs are synced where I can easily open them on my other devices if I desire. Etc.
I also use a regular old PC as an HTPC. I actually thought about setting up an easier to use interface than just the Windows Desktop, but my wife actually prefers navigating a desktop environment with the wireless KBM combo to a more "user friendly" interface.
Which works for me. Less work and it makes it easy for my kids to get into Steam to play their games.
But I guess it all makes sense, I've been using old PCs in this capacity since like 2010 or so, when we still had a big old Sony Trinitron CRT.
home server with the servarr stack fetching from Usenet
sponsorblock for YT on Kodi
NextDNS for the tv for good measure
tv on a vlan with only access to the home assistant instance for automation
No subscriptions besides Usenet (about 5–10$ a month), no snooping from any apps, and all the shows + movies I ever wanted in 4K hdr automatically available in the Kodi interface within an hour of airing.
I use a Google TV streamer. There are probably other, better (cheaper) options for android set top boxes, I've heard the Walmart brand one is actually quite good.
To me, android is where its at for streaming boxes.
It strikes the right balance between a good 10 foot user interface and lack of fucking around with it, that a lot of open source HTPC projects don't, and openness allowing me to stream content from wherever I want, including legally grey areas, that solutions like the apple tv and Roku don't.
My wife is pretty smart and techie, and could figure out an HTPC, with a little pain, but it wouldn't be very pleasant. My parents and friends that come over absolutely could not though, and I don't want to give everyone that comes to my house and uses my TV a 20 minute course on how to fuck around and put a YouTube video on.
If Google ever truly gets rid of sideloading on android, I'll be once again searching for something acceptable, but for now, Android TV is where its at for me.
My setup is a Logitech harmony hub remote and Apple TV 4K. I love my setup, but I can’t recommend either right now. The current model Apple TV is excruciatingly old, so it’s a bad purchase right now. And harmony products have been discontinued for a long time. But once a new Apple TV model is out, I can recommend that.
I have to disagree about the Apple TV. I have the 2022 model, bought in 2025, and I'd say it's very fast. It's much faster than the Roku it replaced. All the controls feel basically instant. I wouldn't hesitate to recommend it to anyone.
It’s a great device for sure. I have the original 4k model from 2017 going strong, although it isn’t the fastest anymore. I’ve wanted to upgrade for around a year now, but buying a device new that was built in 2022 is crazy to me. I am really hopeful that they are announcing a new one tomorrow. If they don’t, I’m not sure what I’m going to do.
It's a TV box; it doesn't need the latest hardware. We use a Firestick 4k, it's the size of an old thumb drive, and it is surprisingly snappy. Besides, if apple announces a new box tomorrow it's going to cost about 4x more than it should.
My Nvidia Shield TV (Android TV) has lasted for nearly a decade now with few complaints, only recently got around to running the Projectivy Launcher for a cleaner home screen.
I've been considering switching to Apple TV whenever the new one comes out since I'm firmly in that ecosystem, looks like that might finally be announced tomorrow. I've also wondered how viable using a docked Steam Deck is since I already have that available but haven't looked into that yet to see if there's any good HTPC-style setup I could easily use.
That's unfortunate to hear. I like my LG TV and I like just using webos connected to the internet.
But that sounds like a line to far tbh.
Might need to plug in old fire stick again, sigh.
You might be the first person I've seen say they actually like webOS. I've been looking at getting an OLED for awhile now and most people agree that LG is the best but they also complain about webOS...and now with this new info on spying I might end up having to pay the massive Sony tax, ugh.
Well ok, "like" webos is a strong statement.
It let's me install stremio and once I turned of all the bloat it just let's me open the apps I want and nothing else.
So really it doesn't do much for me beyond open stremio and since it runs natively it's not dog slow.
It does leave a lot to be desired, I'd not use it if I had a better choice tbh.
Unsurprising to hear this, which is disappointing in its own way. I had my LG TV briefly connected to the internet but I disconnected it a few months ago. The TV kept updating but I never used its built-in webOS interface, opting to use my Google Chromecast and now a Google TV Streamer box instead. It's now essentially a nice dumb TV that's just connected to a smart TV box.
If you only connect to the internet through a separate box (like an Nvidia Shield), are you immune to this, or do they do they have some sort of work around like Amazon Sidewalk to phone home?
If Nvidia Shield blocks all unrelated connections you are good to go. Probably.
Main issue (imho) is that absolutely nothing prevents LG from updating firmware to actively connect to any open WiFi network near you, and send info anyway.
For those curious about hardening your LG TV to prevent this privacy invasion, this is a guide I found. It’s definitely intended for more tech savvy users, it’s a shame that average users have no other option than avoiding using the internet in their TV in the first place.
Tiraon | 19 hours ago
The solution was not to buy "smart" tv maybe decade and a half ago now. Or not act dismissively when anyone brought up wanting a dumb tv.
Nowadays it is genuinely hard to find a just a panel optimized as a tv. I also remain skeptical these revenue streams reduce the cost of the tv in any meaningfull way. Commercial monitors for example are a different product with different requirements for a commercial use, and thus audience. That wil have a large effect on price regardless of anything else.
Regardless, personally I would rather pay the cost upfront rather then be nickel and dimed and a/b tested and exploited and influenced for decades.
papasquat | 18 hours ago
Yeah, but would lots of other people? That's always been the issue with privacy concerns. I hate tracking, I hate ads, and I hate being spied on. I'm willing to pay an extra $1000 for a TV that doesn't do those things.
Is the average consumer though? Probably not. They will mostly just buy whatever has the biggest screen at the cheapest price.
Screen brightness, color reproduction, and contrast are all things that move the needle at the high end, but probably still isn't, even in the market that high end LG TVs compete in.
Its just something that, bafflingly to me, most people don't care about.
286437714 | 5 hours ago
I've had family members buy Kindles that show ads, forever, because they're $20 bucks cheaper.
I've had friends decline for me to set them up with uBlock or a PiHole because 'ads really don't bother me'.
I'm no cyber guy, but I've been using adblockers for such a long time that when we're watching YouTube at a friend's house, the response to an ad break is 'What the fuck?'
I think most people have been habituated to the complete commercialization of the internet, including streaming, where it's viewed just how our parents' generation viewed ads on cable.
It's absolutely baffling when I show them how I can make all the ads stop and the response is 'eh, not for me.' And to be clear, as much as I am IT illiterate for Tildes, I am the person everyone comes to when The Internet Breaks, so I'm not known for being wildly imcompetent or bricking stuff.
vord | 15 hours ago
I'd say most people hate these things, at least once they see what it actually looks like beyond 'close the ad'. They'll tolerate it, but they would also happily sign bans for this stuff in a heartbeat.
[OP] winther | 16 hours ago
Baffling to me as well, but I think it really is just an abstract threat to most people. There is no immediate visible negative side effects as such, and unless we start seeing peoples private conversations being posted on billboards, then I don't think it will really be seen as a big deal for many people.
ButteredToast | 16 hours ago
All the TV manufacturers engage in spyware in some capacity, even if it's "just" automated content recognition.
It's a good reason to keep them offline, to buy brands that aren't as egregiously bad, and to select TVs for the OS they run — something running Android TV for example is going to be easier to reign in than something running webOS, Tizen, or Roku OS for example because you can use the exact same set of tools you'd use to debloat an Android phone to do the same on the TV.
As an example, it's pretty easy to use ADB (Android Debug Bridge) on a laptop to disable/remove the ACR packages on a Sony TV, after which you're left with just plain old Android. Disabled/removed packages along with no internet connection is about the best one can achieve in a smart TV these days, as far as I'm aware.
NomadicCoder | 21 hours ago
Glad that I never once connected my LG TV to the Internet, I've always used it as just a monitor for my Roku (which so far I've yet to hear anything dystopian about them, I hope nobody dashes my naiveté) -- that also means I need to strike LG off of my future consideration list.
chargrilled_broccoli | 21 hours ago
Seems like if the TV could use its wifi to sniff out an open router it would just connect and use it anyway, regardless of any configuration you might or might not have done.
vord | 20 hours ago
And thus the real reason for Amazon Sidewalk. To allow smart devices to report telemetry even without a net connection.
papasquat | 18 hours ago
I don't know about you, but I haven't seen an open SSID in years. I've heard this concern before, but realistically, where are people still running unauthenticated wifi networks?
Durinthal | 18 hours ago
I just opened up the network list on my laptop and saw two pop up, living in a fairly dense urban area (more than 20 total in range). One is "xfinitywifi" so the public hotspot, the other looked like maybe a default name for a router at a glance.
papasquat | 18 hours ago
I see networks without WPA2/WPA3 a lot, but those are almost always locked down with captive portal authentication.
Xfinitywifi definitely is, as part of comcasts "Xfinitynow" service (which as a sidenote, is also fucked as a business model). LG TVs wouldn't have access to those without paying Comcast.
Its possible that someone is either running a 25 year old router, or manually removed the password on their AP, but basically any consumer wifi router of the past few decades has WPA2 authentication out of the box, and most of them have randomized passwords.
Its of course entirely possible to find open public wifi, but personally I've just never encountered it in the past 10 years or so.
Durinthal | 18 hours ago
That was just a cursory scan so good point about captive portals, been a while since I've used any of those and I haven't touched Comcast's myself so wasn't sure how locked down it was. Given the initial topic I wouldn't be surprised if LG was considering a deal with Comcast just for that kind of thing at this point.
After searching a bit I think the other one is some other kind of device going by name, maybe I could control someone else's air conditioner if I connected to it.
papasquat | 18 hours ago
Yeah. If the data is valuable enough to them, that would absolutely be within the realm of possibility. I've also heard of manufacturers embedding LTE radios in devices for communication like this, but I have to imagine that an individuals data isn't valuable enough for that to make sense at scale for a TV.
Plus, they can count on 90% of people just connecting the thing to their wifi anyway, so all of these games are probably unnecessary for their bottom line.
vord | 15 hours ago
No, but with Amazon Sidewalk you could buy a new 'dumb' device that happily reports telemetric data with you being none the wiser.
It's the next gen of engagement: Monetize the theoretical escape of the spyware. Feels like that Black Mirror episode.
vord | 15 hours ago
Also the fake 'xfinitywifi' which impersonates the comcast page and harvests unwitting client's passwords.
l_one | 15 hours ago
If you are in an area with Xfinity you are in an area with open hotspots. I just looked on my wifi and found one after watching part of the Gamers Nexus video on this issue.
On that note, link to that GN video - I know it's in the article but I figure mentioning / linking it directly here would be a bit more accessible for those not reading through the article and just here for the forum discussion.
chargrilled_broccoli | 18 hours ago
It happens a lot in the UK, with EE and others domestic routers running two ssids, one private and one public.
I can see a public EE router right now.
papasquat | 17 hours ago
Pretty horrible practice from both the provider and the consumer's POV. As a consumer, you get to have random people siphoning the bandwidth you're paying for, and the risk of misconfigured ACLs on the device exposing your traffic.
As a provider, you get to lose out on potential customers who don't feel the need to pay you anymore when they can use their neighbors wifi through the wall for free.
No clue why a default open SSID would be desirable for anyone. (Except people who want to mooch off their neighbors wifi I guess)
chargrilled_broccoli | 17 hours ago
When I had BT Internet, I could leech off the WiFi of any other BT customer. As they could mine.
Was sold as a feature. Of course, non BT customers could also pay for access.
In the apartment complex where mum lives they have a guest suite which I rent some times. The resident across the hall has EE internet so when I stay over, I pay for 1 day EE access so I can have some connectivity in the guest room, as there’s bugger all mobile signal.
Weldawadyathink | 18 hours ago
I see this come up in pretty much any discussion about smart TVs, but I have yet to see someone documenting this actually happening. AI wasn’t able to find one either. It seems to me that, for something as straightforward as this to test, there would be at least some documented proof by now.
To be clear, they do upload tracking data when they have WiFi, and they will cache data to send once they have WiFi again. But I haven’t seen credible reports that they will connect to arbitrary unsecured networks to exfiltrate data.
smores | 21 hours ago
The only thing that I'm certain Roku does do is "Automatic Content Recognition" (also mentioned in this video briefly), where it fingerprints content played over the HDMI connection and reports it for advertising purposes. Roku is absolutely an advertising company, just like all of these other smart TV companies are. I remembered there being an exposé about Roku doing this local device snooping waayyyy back in like 2015, but apparently TechCrunch amended that article to say that it was incorrect because Roku said it didn't do that, and I'm not immediately seeing anything more recent with evidence that it does.
updawg | 19 hours ago
The Murdochs (via Fox) are in the process of acquiring Roku for $22B.
vord | 15 hours ago
Most important news I've heard today.
TheRTV | 19 hours ago
Yea that's what I did too. I use Chromecast for streaming. It's also connected to my PC for gaming. I think most people recommend not using the native LG software and not connecting it to the internet lol
Protected | 20 hours ago
So, while we're on the subject, and before I blast my TV's electronics with a tactical nuke, what are the recommendations from people here for alternative set top boxes and other living room app, client and remote controller solutions?
widedub | 19 hours ago
I use an old school htpc setup on two different machines
They work great for streaming and the minisforum can handle some light steam gaming. I use a basic Logitech keyboard with an integrated touch pad for control. We put all of our frequently used apps on the desktop and cranked up the desktop icon size so that they're easily viewable from distance.
I never made the jump to services like plex or jellyfin, we largely use Kodi for media consumption
0x29A | 16 hours ago
Yep, this is similar to what I do. Very much depends on peoples' use cases and if they MUST have a "screen of apps" and a remote-navigable interface. I prefer a full desktop PC experience with a mouse/keyboard.
I have an inexpensive 58 inch Insignia "smart" TV that has FireTV built in- but it stays disconnected from any networks and has not attempted to connect to any access points without my explicit permission. It is set to startup on the same HDMI input every time and never go to the smart interface unless I explicitly request it via the remote to change settings.
For me, after having tried a Roku, Fire TV, and Apple TV and ditching them all for various reasons (each of them just being too annoying, restrictive, poorly-designed, or otherwise, for the amount of control I need/want to exert over my experience), I landed on my "set top box" being a mini PC with linux. Apps would have wildly different audio levels or be extremely buggy compared to their web counterparts, and so on.
I use a browser fullscreen for everything (Youtube, Twitch, Jellyfin- the occasional other service or video, depending). However, I acknowledge that I do not watch live TV or Netflix or any movies/TV in general, with very few exceptions to that rule, so my use case is quite different from many others.
I strongly prefer tabbed interfaces and don't like the "made-for-TV UIs" and "app" ecosystems. Strongly prefer being able to modify/compress/equalize my audio. Strongly prefer having an information-dense interface with no ads. Prefer having access to a full browser, alt-tabbing, and not being forced to use the "app" version of a particular service (like Twitch) which often is garbage compared to the website experience (especially since I use browser extensions and such to customize my experience on various services). I queue up things to watch in tabs. These tabs are synced where I can easily open them on my other devices if I desire. Etc.
BeardyHat | 9 hours ago
I also use a regular old PC as an HTPC. I actually thought about setting up an easier to use interface than just the Windows Desktop, but my wife actually prefers navigating a desktop environment with the wireless KBM combo to a more "user friendly" interface.
Which works for me. Less work and it makes it easy for my kids to get into Steam to play their games.
But I guess it all makes sense, I've been using old PCs in this capacity since like 2010 or so, when we still had a big old Sony Trinitron CRT.
preposterous | 15 hours ago
Very happy with:
No subscriptions besides Usenet (about 5–10$ a month), no snooping from any apps, and all the shows + movies I ever wanted in 4K hdr automatically available in the Kodi interface within an hour of airing.
bravemonkey | 11 hours ago
How did you get Youtube running on Kodi? I've never had luck with it, especially with Google always making it difficult.
PraiseTheSoup | 8 hours ago
Where can you get a OLED dumb tv? I have to assume you don't live in the US as I have looked extensively for just such a unicorn.
papasquat | 18 hours ago
I use a Google TV streamer. There are probably other, better (cheaper) options for android set top boxes, I've heard the Walmart brand one is actually quite good.
To me, android is where its at for streaming boxes.
It strikes the right balance between a good 10 foot user interface and lack of fucking around with it, that a lot of open source HTPC projects don't, and openness allowing me to stream content from wherever I want, including legally grey areas, that solutions like the apple tv and Roku don't.
My wife is pretty smart and techie, and could figure out an HTPC, with a little pain, but it wouldn't be very pleasant. My parents and friends that come over absolutely could not though, and I don't want to give everyone that comes to my house and uses my TV a 20 minute course on how to fuck around and put a YouTube video on.
If Google ever truly gets rid of sideloading on android, I'll be once again searching for something acceptable, but for now, Android TV is where its at for me.
Weldawadyathink | 18 hours ago
My setup is a Logitech harmony hub remote and Apple TV 4K. I love my setup, but I can’t recommend either right now. The current model Apple TV is excruciatingly old, so it’s a bad purchase right now. And harmony products have been discontinued for a long time. But once a new Apple TV model is out, I can recommend that.
redshift | 10 hours ago
I have to disagree about the Apple TV. I have the 2022 model, bought in 2025, and I'd say it's very fast. It's much faster than the Roku it replaced. All the controls feel basically instant. I wouldn't hesitate to recommend it to anyone.
Weldawadyathink | 9 hours ago
It’s a great device for sure. I have the original 4k model from 2017 going strong, although it isn’t the fastest anymore. I’ve wanted to upgrade for around a year now, but buying a device new that was built in 2022 is crazy to me. I am really hopeful that they are announcing a new one tomorrow. If they don’t, I’m not sure what I’m going to do.
PraiseTheSoup | 8 hours ago
It's a TV box; it doesn't need the latest hardware. We use a Firestick 4k, it's the size of an old thumb drive, and it is surprisingly snappy. Besides, if apple announces a new box tomorrow it's going to cost about 4x more than it should.
Durinthal | 17 hours ago
My Nvidia Shield TV (Android TV) has lasted for nearly a decade now with few complaints, only recently got around to running the Projectivy Launcher for a cleaner home screen.
I've been considering switching to Apple TV whenever the new one comes out since I'm firmly in that ecosystem, looks like that might finally be announced tomorrow. I've also wondered how viable using a docked Steam Deck is since I already have that available but haven't looked into that yet to see if there's any good HTPC-style setup I could easily use.
kingofsnake | 4 hours ago
An old PC running Kodi/and or Jellyfin. More flexibility with multiple media types, streaming and more.
The only downside is the keyboard.
kaffo | 19 hours ago
That's unfortunate to hear. I like my LG TV and I like just using webos connected to the internet.
But that sounds like a line to far tbh.
Might need to plug in old fire stick again, sigh.
PraiseTheSoup | 17 hours ago
You might be the first person I've seen say they actually like webOS. I've been looking at getting an OLED for awhile now and most people agree that LG is the best but they also complain about webOS...and now with this new info on spying I might end up having to pay the massive Sony tax, ugh.
kaffo | 17 hours ago
Well ok, "like" webos is a strong statement.
It let's me install stremio and once I turned of all the bloat it just let's me open the apps I want and nothing else.
So really it doesn't do much for me beyond open stremio and since it runs natively it's not dog slow.
It does leave a lot to be desired, I'd not use it if I had a better choice tbh.
chargrilled_broccoli | 16 hours ago
I had the original HP tablet with WebOS back in 2011. it was fine and I had hopes for the platform as a replacement for PalmOS.
It didn’t work out that way sadly
Perryapsis | 19 hours ago
/noise
This article summarizes a long YouTube video.
TurtleCracker | 14 hours ago
We need regulation that requires TVs to light some sort of physical status indicators when recording audio or video.
This should help with transparency as well as add more cost to adding these features. Don’t want to add the light? Don’t record.
BeardyHat | 9 hours ago
Tell the Chud Majority in office that it's illicitly records their Grindr encounters and I bet we'd see legislation the next day.
artvandelay | 17 hours ago
Unsurprising to hear this, which is disappointing in its own way. I had my LG TV briefly connected to the internet but I disconnected it a few months ago. The TV kept updating but I never used its built-in webOS interface, opting to use my Google Chromecast and now a Google TV Streamer box instead. It's now essentially a nice dumb TV that's just connected to a smart TV box.
Interesting | 9 hours ago
If you only connect to the internet through a separate box (like an Nvidia Shield), are you immune to this, or do they do they have some sort of work around like Amazon Sidewalk to phone home?
Deely | 5 hours ago
If Nvidia Shield blocks all unrelated connections you are good to go. Probably.
Main issue (imho) is that absolutely nothing prevents LG from updating firmware to actively connect to any open WiFi network near you, and send info anyway.
UniquelyGeneric | 6 hours ago
For those curious about hardening your LG TV to prevent this privacy invasion, this is a guide I found. It’s definitely intended for more tech savvy users, it’s a shame that average users have no other option than avoiding using the internet in their TV in the first place.